Taking pics when they don't know

[IrishTickle1]

I was reading a few posts and noticed for a while that a lot of people have taken "candid" pics of friends, family and complete strangers. Does anyone else think this is wrong? I mean, some people give their consent and there's no problem with that, but how would you fell if someone took a random pic of you and posted it on fetish sites on the net? I'm pretty sure I'd freak! Basically, it's from seeing so many people post pics of sleeping partners that really gets my goat. These are people who are trusted by this person, but yet they are betrayed by the ones they trust and pictures of them or their body parts are posted as if prizes to show to everyone else. Am I being too prudish to think that maybe some people deserve a little privacy?

 

[Senshi1]

I guess you can turn a blind eye if it's a detatched foot (although it's still a bit wrong), but I think it's pretty bad if you show any more than that, especially if you show their face.

 

[Reed_7891]

i agree with both of you, but more so with Irish.

Seeing as this is a foot fetish/tickling forum, i find it disturbing that someone would actually want to post pics of his Gfs feet to a crowd of people who get off on it, especially if they find their GFs feet sexually attractive themselves.

And yes, it is kind of betraying their loved ones, taking pics when they're asleep, its shameful really.

Personal opinion of course.

 

[TickledToDeath]

It all depends on when where and why the pics(candid) are taken along with what is done with the pics.

 

[Celtic_Emperor]

I think to exploit anyone, whether for fun, profit, or enticement of others, whether to their knowledge or not, is wrong.

Even if one can reasonably rationalize that "what a person doesn't see or know doesn't hurt them", it still doesn't take the blemish away, nor the moral implications involved.

I'm also happy to see that others are courageously displaying their dislike of people posting pictures of their wifes and girlfriends, etc, knowing it sexually arrouses people here, is masturbative material for many, and that they (more often than not) request more.

I find two problems with that:

1.) It means you've created pornography and are cheapening the pictures by sharing them with people who could never value them as much as you could in being the husband, boyfriend, lover, etc, of the beautiful creature you took the pictures of. I'd want to safeguard that and cherish it, not pass it around like a peace pipe and turn it into something perverse by involving third parties. Stroking your ego by sharing your "catch" with your fellow fetishists isn't worth it, and is, in it's own way, degrading.

2.) Provided the woman is unaware of these pictures or that there is no consent for sharing, you've violated, to some extent, her privacy. A man wouldn't want pictures of his mother on the internet knowing men are lusting after her image, and in the same way a man shouldn't want his woman being seen under the same conditions. It should be awkward and uncomfortable. The fact it is not for many of the contributors here and that no one seems to second-guess what they're doing, is a little revolting. Just knowing this material is viable and a commodity in this community, and I see people begging for more and making requests out of place and sometimes out of line, perhaps forgetting who the woman is, is something I'm not proud of the community for, either.

Its one of the darker sides of the fetish that often has no bounds and loved ones are exploited, whether willingly, through cajoling, or without their knowledge.

So yes, I feel taking pictures without anyone knowing should be avoided, even if only out of respect for that person. Its just one of those grey areas where you have to decide whats more important- what you want as a fetishist (which involves selfishness), or safeguarding that person's privacy and dignity, whether they're aware of it or not (a good deed and a test).

 

[Kalamos]

I was reading a few posts and noticed for a while that a lot of people have taken "candid" pics of friends, family and complete strangers. Does anyone else think this is wrong?

I do.

Not just because I prize privacy, but because it's plain dangerous: you never know who's gonna see those pics, or what they are going to do.
Same thing with mainstream contents, such as spontaneous tickling pics lifted off from personal pages or blogs.

Of course we can't stop sharing pics altogether, but I usually urge posters to edit unique features out, such as faces or license plates.
Or I do it myself, when I can.
You'd be surprised to discover just how many people *think* they've been smart, wearing masks or makeups, while leaving something just as readily recognisable in plain sight.
A guy left his own *daughter* in. Another his car's plate. And a well known artist his sister's face, albeit slightly out of focus... 😉

So, no, you're not being prudish.
I just call it a healthy dose of life-saving paranoia. 🙂

 

[Amber10]

I dunno if i agree cuz some times it is bad but also is good cuz if you see an amazing girl and you get a pic of her feet its kinda like a prize in itself cuz ur just glad that its your picture and if people do not want to show it off its there choice and if somone did find out that there pictures was on the website then whoever put it on will be the one who gets a slap so they will have to suffer.

 

[Cbarton]

But, Amber10, you seem to be ignoring te person being photographed! What may be a 'prize' to you could be a man or woman who does not to be leered and lusted over by thousands or millions of unknown people logging onto the web. Even professional photographers are legally required to get signed consent to use a model's image (whole or any part of his/her body) for use beyond what the initial contract states the photos are for (calendar, catalog, etc.).

What about the innocent girl who finds out a shot of her on the beach with her friends has become the latest "hottie of the month' on some website? An attorney would have a field day with that. Same case coudl happen with any shot used here without there permission, esp. if they are not a participant in tickling per se.

 

[Hungarian21]

faces need 2 be blurred at least; unless of course the person agrees to this.

 

[Reed_7891]

Personally i think Candid shots should not be allowed on a public forum such as this, especially home made ones.

I'm sure many will disagree seeing as it would lead to a decrease in foot-fetish material

 

[labrat78]

I always ask if a person winds up in an of mine. To me it is just common sense

 

[MistressValerie1]

Some photographers at candid-photo sites have reported legal problems related to their posting of unauthorised photos. The best and safest policy is to get the subjects' permission in writing before posting any non-public, amateur photos. The next-best is to obscure faces and all other identifying features before posting, but that may carry some risk.

 

[scavenger]

And a well known artist his sister's face, albeit slightly out of focus... 😉

I suppose you are referring to one of my recent posts, Kalamos?
I thorougly checked my pics to make sure nothing showed my sister's identity, but it's always possible for details to slip from my attention (though it has to be VERY out of focus to do so). If you refer to my drawing, well, I can tell you that the portrait in this drawing is a very stylized version of my sister's face.

Anyways I asked my sister several times if it was ok to post these pics, and I would never had posted them if she wasn't completely comfortable with it.

I too am against the posting of "candid pics", even if they are just of "anonymous" feet. But when they are taken with the full consent the person to who these feet belong, and this person is fully aware and comfortable of where the pics will be posted, I've got nothing against it.

 

[Kalamos]

I suppose you are referring to one of my recent posts, Kalamos?

Your sister's pics.
In one of the pics I could see your sister's face.
Didn't they tell ya?

 

[P[a]pi]

I would never post any pictures of anyone I know on this site, whether they were okay with it or not, but that is just me. Artwork of a person is different.

I think I know why some people post candid pics of people they know though. I think they are showing off somewhat, and I can understand it, but I don't agree with it. Most people on this forum have never tied up somebody and tickled them. Once they do it, or just tickle someone without bondage, I think they want to brag to the community somewhat. Kinda like, "Hey, look what I got to do!"

It's kind of like how a guy might tell his friends that he finally had sex with his girlfriend and his friends would be happy for him. I'm not like this, but I know some guys are haha. But with tickling and bondage it's different. It's not as normal, so it's like you gotta prove it happened.

Don't get me wrong. I think stories of whatever you did are fine, as long as names are changed, but I think pics are too much. If somebody says they tie up and tickle their girlfriend, I'll believe them. I don't need to see pics of it.

And one more thing. Telling somebody, "Hey, I'm gonna put these pics on a tickling forum," that knows nothing of tickling forums isn't really fair. I wonder if the people that have been told where the pics are going really know about the forum. Do they know that somebody will probably be masterbating to some pics of their feet? If you told the person that way I think they might decline to have the pics posted.

 

[scavenger]

Your sister's pics.
In one of the pics I could see your sister's face.
Didn't they tell ya?

No they didn't... Thank you for pointing out.
I fixed the problem, not that it absolutely mattered, because her face was so blurred and distorted by shadows, that it was not recognizable as that of my sister anyway.