Yes, it's infuriating. Jailbait and creepshots bother me immensely as a photographer (forgetting the regular-human part for a second). But what can you do abou

Yes, it's infuriating. Jailbait and creepshots bother me immensely as a photographer (forgetting the regular-human part for a second). But what can you do about it? When I first started shooting street I didn't seek permission from anyone else either, and I'm quite certain I've come off as "the creep with the camera" in my hapless beginner stumbling. We don't have the right to restrict the privileges we need, and even if we had the right we'd have no idea how to implement such a restriction. Hell, I probably still do. In fact, I know I still do on occasion. As for privacy - street photography requires at least a little bit of instinctive amorality. Personally - and I've heard other photographers describe the same phenomenon - you train yourself to compose it and shoot it before the other side of your brain kicks in and says "but wait...". Faster than the speed of your moral compass? :P I curate very hard, both for my own sake as well as the subjects. Photography is a craft where it's very easy to make untoward implications merely by composing craftily. I scrub all results to make sure crafty composition never comes off negatively on the subject - unless the negative aspect existed as I shot the picture. A man angrily screaming at a police officer? I'll take that. A shot where it looks like someone is eyeing a woman's ass but isn't really? Nope. I also retain copyright on all street photographs. I do not release any street photographs under any CC licenses - I trust my own judgment on where and how to show these photographs, but not others. It's something of a symbolic gesture though - once a JPEG is in the wild your control over it is limited at best. The last part is no homeless pictures ever. There's a huge train of thought behind this one for the sake of brevity I won't expand on.