on 5/21/01 11:29 AM, Lynn Allen at email@example.com wrote:
> Yeah, but I wonder about the fine print! :-) OTOH, it's a darned good idea.
> Of course, Street People, if they know the guy is giving out $1 bills, might
> hog the camera! Kinda restricts your subject matter a little! :-)
I have a problem with giving out money for photographing people on the
streets. (a) your relationship is contractual rather than a voluntary
arrangement but much more importantly (b) I'd rather people wanted to be
photographed without payment entering into it. Also (c) it is kind of unfair
to all the people you DON'T give money to, and (d) John Matturi's point that
often you'd have to have a support team with you also holds.
If you do want to photograph street people and you feel that you should give
them something in return I think the most gracious thing to do is to give
them money FIRST and then ask if you can have a picture.
Funnily enough having not pointedly NOT photographed street people for many
years now, I am about to embark on a project where I want to. I thought what
I might do is copy what Rob Appleby did in India, and go down to the local
shelter and find someone generally regarded as sane & reliable and pay them
to be a sort of guide/assistant. So maybe a fixed fee for a photograph of
others would be appropriate in these circumstances.