Portraits

The portraits I took were of people in my workplace. One of these people is someone I work with on a daily basis and am also friends with outside of work. The other subject works in a different department within my building; I didn't know her until I took her pictures. I am curious to know if anyone can tell the difference. I like these photographs because the environment is the same for both sets, the workplace. When you are photographing someone you know, there is a level of trust and understanding - your subject is willing to be photographed without it seeming awkward. When the subject is unfamiliar it is always a little precarious because people are extremely suspicious of being photographed. I find that people are less concerned about being photographed than they are about the intent you have for the finished photographs. If you can help them understand that your motivations are innocent and of no threat to them, they seem, generally, to warm up to the idea. This concept of the intent behind photographs is something I discuss in my writing on photojournalistic ethics. I have included that writing here:

 Photojournalism and ethics present very sticky crossroads. I like the concept that Whitney Mundt puts forth that photojournalists should not photograph people simply because they are famous, but they should wait until they are involved in a situation that has intrinsic news value. I think ethics most need to be considered when the subject of a photo is a person or people. As a photojournalist you need to be familiar with the laws to protect yourself, but you should also just be able to use common sense. I find in general that people have become way too sensitive about things. In 2008, you should know how the world works, and that photographers are out there doing their jobs, and that there is money to be made, and that photographs have power. If you are involved in something newsworthy, I think you can expect there to be photos. I think the laws about disclosure of private facts are interesting. I think that whether something is private or not is irrelevant so long as the picture was obtained ethically. I think "Be Honest" is the most important concept for a photographer. Don't lie to get a shot, don't break the rules, get permission to be in places you normally wouldn't be able to be. I believe that as long as you stay within the boundaries of the law it is okay to shoot anything you can shoot. The whole "right to photograph anything you have the right to look at" concept. I think you need to analyze your ethics at the point where you decide what you are going to do with the finished photos. It may be legal to shoot into someone's window from the street or sidewalk, and I don't see a problem with that concept per se, but what I would want to know is why. Was there a reason for taking the picture that was newsworthy, or did the picture only become newsworthy because of what it captured? Just because you capture an image that may be questionable doesn't mean it was unethical to me. In the era of digital photos, it is easy to delete, and that is where ethics come in. Apply your ethics to the decisions you make about what will come of the photos that have been taken. I think as a photographer trying to figure out your own ethics the best place to start is to look at your own motivation. You know why you are taking a photograph....start there.