Frantic Posted July 29, 2003 Posted July 29, 2003 Just thought I'd ask the question, what are your thoughts on high-heel streetshots websites? I have to admit I've scoured various sights and as I do enjoy 'heel-spotting' when I'm out, I enjoyed the content of the sites, but I know allot of people seem those kind of pictures as an invasion of privacy, even if the sites blank out the girls face in the picture. Just wondered what everyone else thought, for the girls on this forum who love to wear heels, how would you feel if you saw your picture on one of those sites?
Heelfan Posted July 29, 2003 Posted July 29, 2003 Hello Frantic. The recent rise of these streetheels sites is an EXCELLENT trend. They are rightly very popular because we're all tired of seeing artifically posed models in artificial bedrooms posing in fetish heels that were hitherto unworn (confirmed by usually being three sizes to big and the soles totally unworn) and usually not even standing up or walking in them. Streetheel shots are the REAL THING. Real ladies going about their real lives in their real high-heeled shoes - infinitely better! This sort of photography is NOT an invasion of privacy in the least. I understand that the law on press photography etc. says (quite rightly in my opinion) that anything or anybody visible in a PUBLIC place can be photographed at will because if anybody wants to appear in public (wearing high heels for instance), that shows that they are prepared to been seen by the world at large, and there is no real difference between the public seeing them in the flesh or seeing them in a photograph. In fact, the streetheels photographs are LESS of an invasion that being seen in the street because most of the faces are obscured. Taking intrusive photographs without permission in a place regarded as private (inside someone's house or premises) even for example when the photographer is outside the premises but using a powerful telephoto lense that a passer-by would not normally have, or concealing themselves inside the property DOES become an invasion of privacy and can contravene the law. Even outside in public, it would be an invasion of privacy for instance to stick a camera up under a lady's skirt, but photographs taken in public of anything we see around us in the normal course of events is, by my understanding, perfectly legal and publishable and is in no way immoral. Cheerfully yours, Heelsfan Onwards and upwards!
Firefox Posted July 30, 2003 Posted July 30, 2003 I don't think it's even necessary to blank out the faces. So long as the photos are presented in a facual way such as "here are some pictures of street fashions 2003" with no attempt made to to take the shot out of context or otherwise defame the character of those in the picture.
Laurieheels Posted July 30, 2003 Posted July 30, 2003 What one should do is pay a person a small amount to be in a certain place at a certain time. Say, a heel wearing "model" is going to be shopping somewhere.(model meaning the person who will be features, who'd have enough to rent out a real model for this?) She tells the photographer "I'll wear heels and be in this area at this time". She doesn't know exactly when the shots are snapped, but she knows to strut it because they might be. She isn't exactly posing this way. Willing model, who will allow her face to be shown, gets a bit of money, and a more realistic action shot is taken. Problem solved.
Heelfan Posted July 30, 2003 Posted July 30, 2003 Yes Laurie, that's all very well, and I think one or two streetheel sites from Germany do actually appear to mingle high-heeled models into the streetscene. However, that it missing my point - many of us guys don't WANT to see yet more models standing there in a pair of heels that have probably only been handed to them out of a box by some racketeer exploiter only seconds before and that they are never likely to wear again. We get our buzz from seeing REAL high-heel wearers who have chosen their heels of their own free will and have chosen to treat the general public to them. The British "Streetheels" site is excellent in this respect. Also, as I've related above, there is nothing illegal or immoral about photographing or publishing anything or anybody that is ALREADY on full public view. What is the problem - I can't see one! Cheerfully Yours, Heelsfan Onwards and upwards!
Yamyam Posted July 30, 2003 Posted July 30, 2003 As far as I know, you're allowed to photograph people on the streets, and as long as you're careful about it, you should be okay. As a man, tho', I'd be careful of taking photos of women's feet, as you could land up earning a thump from her (or her partner) before having a chance to explain. I'd either try and be really subtle (camera phones are good for this) or let Julietta take the pictures, personally. I must admit, I do like the streetheels photos more than 'posed' photos. It's the attraction of sneaking a quick look. Having said that, I like the photos on this forum, as they're much more natural than the ones I've seen elsewhere. That reminds me, must take some more photos tonight Obsessed is such a strong word. I prefer to think of myself as "differently enthusiastic"
Laurieheels Posted July 31, 2003 Posted July 31, 2003 Yes Laurie, that's all very well, and I think one or two streetheel sites from Germany do actually appear to mingle high-heeled models into the streetscene. However, that it missing my point - many of us guys don't WANT to see yet more models standing there in a pair of heels that have probably only been handed to them out of a box by some racketeer exploiter only seconds before and that they are never likely to wear again. We get our buzz from seeing REAL high-heel wearers who have chosen their heels of their own free will and have chosen to treat the general public to them. The British "Streetheels" site is excellent in this respect. My point in saying model was only to say the target of the photographs. I am talking about finding a woman who wers them normally, and thus the pictures are of a real woman, and all that happens is she receives a little bit of money to give away her position on a certain day, so the photographer can be nearby and grab a few shots. She wouldn't know the exact moment of any picture being taken, and she wouldn't have contact with the photographer as he took the pictures. Thus, not a model wearing something fresh out of the box, being exploited or however you put it.
Frantic Posted July 31, 2003 Author Posted July 31, 2003 Hello Frantic. The recent rise of these streetheels sites is an EXCELLENT trend. They are rightly very popular because we're all tired of seeing artifically posed models in artificial bedrooms posing in fetish heels that were hitherto unworn (confirmed by usually being three sizes to big and the soles totally unworn) and usually not even standing up or walking in them. Streetheel shots are the REAL THING. Real ladies going about their real lives in their real high-heeled shoes - infinitely better! My thoughts EXACTLY!! so, anyone got any good links for me to hit!?
Robert Posted July 31, 2003 Posted July 31, 2003 Hi Frantic, there is Streetheels.co.uk from the member Streetheels of this board. If you like boots there is BBCD Boots Page, a German site with a section of street shots. Robert Boots, fascinating footwear http://s70.photobucket.com/albums/i103/Boots_1956/
Heelfan Posted August 1, 2003 Posted August 1, 2003 OK - these Street-heel sites are all worth a regular look-in: http://www.streetheels.co.uk/ British - the Guest Gallery is best! http://digidigix.ktplan.ne.jp/walkroad/ Japanese, changing 'Today' photo http://www.renge.sakura.ne.jp/~lmc/pho.htm Another Japanese. http://home.interlink.or.jp/~coza/ Similar. http://www.bbcd.de/ German street-boots - mostly low heels though. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HeelsinPublic/ New British site. http://www.usedshoes.ch German ALL types (heels, flats, trainers etc.). I've also come across other street-heel sites from the US, Germany etc., but I'll have to have another surf around the Net to re-discover those for you. Happy heel-viewing! Cheerfully Yours, Heelsfan Onwards and upwards!
Robert Posted August 1, 2003 Posted August 1, 2003 http://www.range.sakura.ne.jp/~lmc/pho.htm Another Japanese. Sorry Heelfan, it has to be "renge" in the url. http://www.renge.sakura.ne.jp/~lmc/pho.htm Boots, fascinating footwear http://s70.photobucket.com/albums/i103/Boots_1956/
Heelfan Posted August 2, 2003 Posted August 2, 2003 Thanks Robert! You are a GENIUS to spot that little typo, anf to know how it should be changed. I have edited/corrected my posting now! Cheerfully yours, Heelfan Onwards and upwards!
PJ Posted August 2, 2003 Posted August 2, 2003 Just thought I'd ask the question, what are your thoughts on high-heel streetshots websites? I have to admit I've scoured various sights and as I do enjoy 'heel-spotting' when I'm out, I enjoyed the content of the sites, but I know allot of people seem those kind of pictures as an invasion of privacy, even if the sites blank out the girls face in the picture. Just wondered what everyone else thought, for the girls on this forum who love to wear heels, how would you feel if you saw your picture on one of those sites? I am not interested in sites like this. But I do have some comments to offer. There are places where people have an expectation of privacy. This would include a room with windows and doors closed, or if they were in some kind of enclosure on private property. If this person is anywhere where other people, especially strangers, can see them, then there is no expectation of privacy. I can see that if you post pictures on a commercial web site (where you generate income), then it would seem appropriate that you pay all of your models. And if your site has totally free access, then I see nothing wrong with posting public view photos. But I would not post any other personal information that could identify the person in the photos. click .... click .... click .... The sensual sound of stiletto heels on a hard surface.
Heelfan Posted August 2, 2003 Posted August 2, 2003 Yes PJ, I think you have more or less repeated and endorsed what we have each been saying above. I hope this concensus of opinion will help (and encourage) all those who who wish to photograph public high-heel-wearers! Cheerfully yours, Heelfan Onwards and upwards!
hoverfly Posted August 2, 2003 Posted August 2, 2003 Unless, you have permission from that person. Also it should be stated with the picture and info. And if your site has totally free access, then I see nothing wrong with posting public view photos. But I would not post any other personal information that could identify the person in the photos. Hello,  my name is Hoverfly. I’m a high heel addict…. Weeeeeeeeeee!  👠1998 to 2022!
Spikey Dan Posted August 10, 2003 Posted August 10, 2003 I posed this question amongst the photographers that I know and it was unaminous on what they had to say. If you photograph a full-length shot of a person, and the persons face is recognizable, that person should be compensated for the pic (like what Laurie mentioned), but......that person must sign a release form to release all rights of photo in exchange, much like the transactions in the modeling industry. So a person who wants to do that kind of photography, you better bring a big wad of cash and a stack of release forms, or risk an even bigger wad of cash in court. In the other hand, one photographs only the shoes, then it is close to impossible to claim ownership. Dan
Laurieheels Posted August 10, 2003 Posted August 10, 2003 Ah heck, I'll just be mean about it. Dan is right, people's faces mean people have rights over it. All of you looking for some pure and natural high heeled moment to capture on film are looking for an ideal, and ideals do not exist in a pure form. Be happy with what you can get, and avoid slaps across the face, law suits, and arrests. I tried to provide an excellent idea, whereby a natural situation of someone who can wear heels and wear them well is captured covertly, providing the pictures you are looking for. No one could understand it, instead complaining about models who only slip on the heels for the first time when the photos are taken, and then can't actually wear them. That's not my idea at all... People deserve respect, and we shouldn't be snapping pics of people for some sort of personal pleasure level, and not respecting the person who has been used in those photographs. See, if I were to volunteer myself for a high heeled photo shoot, then it would be fine, since I am in essence giving the people who view the pictures permission to carry on as they see fit. But some woman on the street, it's like she's being turned into something she may not wish to be. Sexual icon? Fetish image? She is being used for something without permission and maybe that's not a good thing. You need to seek out the compromise in this situation and make the best of it. None of us ever gets everything we want just the way we want it, and get it all of the time. I am starting to think that I would love to be in an agreement for covert photos, just to protect those who may not wish to be capped and displayed on the net. There's a need, a market, and in these tough times for myself, I would love to take advantage of that. Everyone wins that way. But please, the unassuming woman on the street is not asking to be your secret image of adoration. Maybe she just likes wearing heels for heels sake. Let's respect that, and respect her.
Firefox Posted August 11, 2003 Posted August 11, 2003 Well where does it end? Those tourists snapping pictures of street scenes in London for their own personal use and pleasure. Are they going around with wads of cash or release forms compensating any building owners or people that happen to appear in the shots? What about those contemporay histrorians who record the life around their towns for future generations to look back on. How many wads of cash and release forms have they dished out?
PJ Posted August 11, 2003 Posted August 11, 2003 Here are some interesting sites that deal with this issue of right of privacy and photographing people. http://www.onlineharassment.com/photos.htm http://gnwda.org/tutorials/Q&A/photos.htm And if you want to read some SHOCKING news , check out http://www.womensenews.org/article.cfm/dyn/aid/1054/context/archive click .... click .... click .... The sensual sound of stiletto heels on a hard surface.
Laurieheels Posted August 11, 2003 Posted August 11, 2003 Well, maybe it shuold come down to what the pictures are going to be used for. Family photo albums? Okay. Historical purposes to edcuate future generations? sure! Getting excited over a pair of high heels, well, how does this benefit society, or family? For the first two cases, people captured in the picture may not be the focus of the picture. The picture is not specficially of those people, or any part of those people. They are just there, in the background. Maybe a local has posed for something, being informed of the picture, and willingly appearing in it. Again, fine, the person was given the choice and accepted it. That's great, no release, good cause. But covert pictures designed to get arousal out of people? Leave out the faces then, just focus on the shoes. There has to be a limit, and we have to create it in an arbitrary fashion. Which means, pick a place, draw the line, enforce it. Otherwise, years of debate will still fail to solve anything.
Heelfan Posted August 12, 2003 Posted August 12, 2003 I agree with Laurie that it is KINDER to exclude or obliterate faces, but it it not required by the law IF it the person is photograped in a public place. Let us not winge on and make the matter seem more difficult or complicated than it really is, because we may scare-off budding young photographers instead of encouraging them to photograph street-heelers and maybe submit them to these forums. To repeat, if the person is in a PUBLIC place, they have demonstrated their willingness to be seen by the public at large, and the law does not differenciate between their being seen 'in the flesh' by passers-by, or being seen on photographs taken by a passer-by. Only if the photograph is used for financail gain (advertising a product etc.), or if the person is identified on a caption and the photogaph is used to defame, damage or bring into disrepute their character in some way, does the publication of the photograph risk contravening the law. Budding photographers can be helped by getting some tips and advice by professionals, and I for one would love to see more perfectly legal 'Street-heel photos. Don't be put-off, get those shutters clicking, and I look forward to your posted pics! Cheerfully yours, Heelfan. Onwards and upwards!
Spikey Dan Posted August 12, 2003 Posted August 12, 2003 Well where does it end? Those tourists snapping pictures of street scenes in London for their own personal use and pleasure. Are they going around with wads of cash or release forms compensating any building owners or people that happen to appear in the shots? What about those contemporay histrorians who record the life around their towns for future generations to look back on. How many wads of cash and release forms have they dished out? Now you are talking about something totally different. Photographing people is one thing, photographing places and things is something else. Buildings, natural landmarks, and even cars, boats, trains, and planes is considered public domain. Therefore a photographer is well within their artistic expression to photograph them. If there is a photo worthy enough to be published in a magazine, it is common courtesy to get a property release form from the owner or a company representative. Dan
Laurieheels Posted August 12, 2003 Posted August 12, 2003 Financial gain is advertising a product? What about pay for use fetish sites? These pictures could show up there, and it is difficult to police such sites. So in essence, an unassuming woman's picture as she does her thing in heels, becomes used to sell sex on the internet. That's my issue. That's my concern. Women are not objects, they're people, and once it crosses over into something that makes money, well, that's just wrong.
Heelfan Posted August 12, 2003 Posted August 12, 2003 That's my point (and the law's point) entirely, Laurie. But on charge-free non-commercial sites such as as Megaforum's "Sightings" and the UK's great "Streeheels", I don't think anyone need worry about publishing a streetscene with one or more high-heeled ladies in it, even if the faces are recognisable - the ladies have already made their choice and come fully into the public domain. However, as I say, even though not a legal requirement, it is KINDER to omit or obscure the face. Happy street-heeling and street-snapping y'aall! Cheerfully yours, Heelfan. Onwards and upwards!
Firefox Posted August 12, 2003 Posted August 12, 2003 If you photograph buildings/street scenes, there just might "happen" to be some people in the shots by ermm.... accident Here's an interesting photo I took recording a bus shelter design:
Laurieheels Posted August 13, 2003 Posted August 13, 2003 Yes, but we can't see her face, so it's fine. Nothing wrong with taking a picture from an angle that can obscure the face. Just remember, be kind to the person, if you get a face, I don't know, fire up a pair of sunglasses in some paint program and add them on or something. There'a always a way to give women the respect they deserve...
Yamyam Posted August 13, 2003 Posted August 13, 2003 Personally, I'd always take the photo to preserve the subject's anonymity, or at the least, crop it before I ship it. I've posted some street heels shots, and I must admit to going thru a bit of an internal debate before I did it, but since there were no faces in the picture, I managed to wrestle the battered remains of my conscience to the ground and proceed. This whole debate reminds me of a story I was once told when I lived in Oxford. Apparently, there's a location, somewhere along the river Isis, known as 'Parson's Pleasure'. It was the custom of the Dons (important University types) to sunbathe in the nude at this spot. Of course, being Oxford, this was well known, and impressionable young ladies were supposed to avoid it. One day, a punt full of young ladies drifted into the area, by accident, surprising the assembled dons. All but one immediately covered their crotch areas with whatever came to hand. The remaining don pulled a towel over his head. After the ladies had passed, he removed the towel, and looked around. On seeing his colleages astounded faces, he replied 'I'm not sure about you lot, but around the town, I am recognised by my face!" Obsessed is such a strong word. I prefer to think of myself as "differently enthusiastic"
Heelfan Posted August 14, 2003 Posted August 14, 2003 Hilarious! Also a story with a profound moral! Cheerfully yours, Heelfan Onwards and upwards!
Heelfan Posted August 27, 2003 Posted August 27, 2003 Hello All! I've just edited my above posting of 1st August by adding the domain name of yet another Street-Heel picture site to the bottom of my list, making a new total of seven streetheel sites in all! Not bad huh? Happy viewing! Cheerfully yours, Heelfan Onwards and upwards!
Spikey Dan Posted August 27, 2003 Posted August 27, 2003 Great anecdote Yamyam. Very humorous, but also made a great point. :rofl:
Recommended Posts