Another vacation etiquette question

[citadelle]

They were my words. I believe in sharing what I have and I choose friends who do the same. You are free to choose friends using other criteria.

Thanks for those of you who have gone along with the birth of a new word! 

[snowdragon]

In fact, the only thing being stated in this thread on this side of it is that certain people would find the refusal odd.  Nothing more.  Yet words like "not obligated, not entitled, my property, my rights, my art" etc keep getting thrown around as if anyone is even remotely debating a photographer's right to keep their photos.  We all agree that it is your property and you can keep it. 

I think the only thing the travel companion did wrong was to expect the photos without asking nicely first.  I think anytime someone asks for something they do so with an expectation of at least possibly getting a yes, otherwise we would never ask anyone for anything!  So I don't think an expectation of probably getting a yes is wrong or "entitled", but I do think asking nicely is required.  Of course, he should take no for an answer and not push.  But I can understand why this didn't go down well, since the OP herself admits that she had a hard time giving a straight answer.  When someone won't give a straight yes or no answer, it is frustrating for everyone involved.

No we don't all agree.  Here several posters said they'd let the friendship cool if they couldn't have the pictures. I think I can extrapolate from that they feel entitled to them.

We are talking about how someone would FEEL if their friend refused to share travel photos with them, not whether they actually think that they have a legal right to them. The two are not even remotely the same thing and I have not seen one person argue that the photographer literally MUST hand them over.  If I have missed that, please point it out.  I don't think the exrapolating you are doing is accurate.

If they did not feel entitled to them - there would be no need for the friendship to cool. The fact that the owner if denying them something they feel entitled to is what's going to make them back off the friendship, if the feeling that they had the right to the pictures was not present then the owner keeping the photos would not be questioned - it would be completely natural.

[CakeEater]

In fact, the only thing being stated in this thread on this side of it is that certain people would find the refusal odd.  Nothing more.  Yet words like "not obligated, not entitled, my property, my rights, my art" etc keep getting thrown around as if anyone is even remotely debating a photographer's right to keep their photos.  We all agree that it is your property and you can keep it. 

I think the only thing the travel companion did wrong was to expect the photos without asking nicely first.  I think anytime someone asks for something they do so with an expectation of at least possibly getting a yes, otherwise we would never ask anyone for anything!  So I don't think an expectation of probably getting a yes is wrong or "entitled", but I do think asking nicely is required.  Of course, he should take no for an answer and not push.  But I can understand why this didn't go down well, since the OP herself admits that she had a hard time giving a straight answer.  When someone won't give a straight yes or no answer, it is frustrating for everyone involved.

No we don't all agree.  Here several posters said they'd let the friendship cool if they couldn't have the pictures. I think I can extrapolate from that they feel entitled to them.

We are talking about how someone would FEEL if their friend refused to share travel photos with them, not whether they actually think that they have a legal right to them. The two are not even remotely the same thing and I have not seen one person argue that the photographer literally MUST hand them over.  If I have missed that, please point it out.  I don't think the exrapolating you are doing is accurate.

No-one's talking about legal rights. The very fact of asking someone for something implies that you feel like you should be able to have it, otherwise, as someone said earlier, you wouldn't have asked.

[bloo]

They were my words. I believe in sharing what I have and I choose friends who do the same. You are free to choose friends using other criteria.

Thanks for those of you who have gone along with the birth of a new word! 

Your welcome! I'll use the new word I am sure!

But your post does make me feel that you're implying that I don't believe in sharing. I do. But I believe that I get to decide what I share. Some of my friends feel the same. Some don't. We bump up against each other. Which is the life and breath of this board.

[delabela]

I believe I contributed to the discussion on letting the friendship cool, so I'd perhaps like to explain myself - it's not "I didn't get what I want, so good bye to you," it's more a recognition that perhaps that person and I approach things differently, and that we were not as close as I assumed.  I think this is a result of me viewing the pictures as mementos of the trip, and not as an end in themselves (not that either of those is more right than the other).  I certainly don't think it makes me (or anyone else) "entitled," just as a refusal to share the pictures is not "entitled."  This doesn't extrapolate to things like leftovers, a nice scarf you happen to wear, anything I see in your house - those aren't the product of a shared experience. 

[CakeEater]

I believe I contributed to the discussion on letting the friendship cool, so I'd perhaps like to explain myself - it's not "I didn't get what I want, so good bye to you," it's more a recognition that perhaps that person and I approach things differently, and that we were not as close as I assumed.  I think this is a result of me viewing the pictures as mementos of the trip, and not as an end in themselves (not that either of those is more right than the other).  I certainly don't think it makes me (or anyone else) "entitled," just as a refusal to share the pictures is not "entitled."  This doesn't extrapolate to things like leftovers, a nice scarf you happen to wear, anything I see in your house - those aren't the product of a shared experience.

I really do understand your point of view. But the OP and others view photographs as artworks as well as mementos and value them accordingly. They do see them as an end in themselves.

[Two Ravens]

In fact, the only thing being stated in this thread on this side of it is that certain people would find the refusal odd.  Nothing more.  Yet words like "not obligated, not entitled, my property, my rights, my art" etc keep getting thrown around as if anyone is even remotely debating a photographer's right to keep their photos.  We all agree that it is your property and you can keep it. 

I think the only thing the travel companion did wrong was to expect the photos without asking nicely first.  I think anytime someone asks for something they do so with an expectation of at least possibly getting a yes, otherwise we would never ask anyone for anything!  So I don't think an expectation of probably getting a yes is wrong or "entitled", but I do think asking nicely is required.  Of course, he should take no for an answer and not push.  But I can understand why this didn't go down well, since the OP herself admits that she had a hard time giving a straight answer.  When someone won't give a straight yes or no answer, it is frustrating for everyone involved.

No we don't all agree.  Here several posters said they'd let the friendship cool if they couldn't have the pictures. I think I can extrapolate from that they feel entitled to them.

We are talking about how someone would FEEL if their friend refused to share travel photos with them, not whether they actually think that they have a legal right to them. The two are not even remotely the same thing and I have not seen one person argue that the photographer literally MUST hand them over.  If I have missed that, please point it out.  I don't think the exrapolating you are doing is accurate.

No-one's talking about legal rights. The very fact of asking someone for something implies that you feel like you should be able to have it, otherwise, as someone said earlier, you wouldn't have asked.

So asking for anything = feeling entitled to have it? One should never ask for a recipe, favor, copy of a photo, anything? If I ask a friend to pass me the canapes, it means I am being entitled?

In my social circle, it would be assumed that photos of a shared event are meant to be shared as well. In fact, I think the OP should have been the one to warn her friend, "You have to take your own photos, since I am not going to be sharing mine."

(It's funny, I have a friend who almost the opposite situation happened to. One of her in-laws set herself up as the group "photographer." She actively discouraged anyone else from taking pictures. But then when she sent out the photos, she spalshed her watermark all over them, rendering them useless for the group, who wanted to use them for portraits, christmas cards, etc.)

[Allyson]

I don't think it's about being a generous person or entitled person or anything like that. Of course people get to decide what they share and don't, but 'get to' doesn't encompass the other person's reaction. The right is to keep your property to yourself--not to have your friend have no negative reaction. I really think it is about the specific act of photography.

A non-photographer, like me, would expect photo-sharing on a vacation. That's how everyone's done it, and I'd be very surprised if someone wanted to keep the pictures all for them. But to someone who is seriously into photography, it's obviously different. The photographer might be really generous about other things.

I guess what I'm saying is I don't think it's accurate to characterize a photo-sharer as someone who feels 'entitled' to other people's work, nor a non-photo-sharer as a selfish person who is more concerned with what's theirs than a friendship. I think it's about how photography is framed. To some people, it's equivalent of that term paper--sure, it won't cause the photographer to lose anything by sharing it, but it's their effort spent. To others, it's more equivalent of one person knowing the local language and the other not--it just makes sense to share.

Neither view is necessarily *wrong*, but since it's clear from this thread that there are two distinct schools of thought, it might be better to figure out which your travel companions are.

[Cami]

If I buy a meal and don't finish it, someone else at my table may want to do so. Snce I paid for the meal, I can say no, it is my right, but to do so would be pointless and, I would say, hoardish (I know that is not actually a word). It is my meal to do with as I please, but I might end up a lonely diner.

People have reasons for wanting things the way they are that might seem weird to us, but they have a right to do them, and in the absence of other hoardish* or selfish tendencies, it's best to assume that this is a difference of perspective, and not a reflection on how your friends feel about you.

This is certainly true, but within the context of a friendship I think it's easier and more kind to actually give a friend some kind of explanation (talking about the photos, not the food) to avoid hurting feelings.

Human nature is such that we naturally seek explanations and in the absence of an explanation from the source, people will devise their own. The conclusions may be right, they may be wrong, they may be flattering or they may be negative, but the fact of the matter is the vast majority of people will not leave the issue unresolved in their own minds. They will come to a conclusion.

I prefer the truth and straight talk over hemming and hawing and avoidance. Hemming and hawing and avoidance are not polite to me in the slightest, they are, in fact, the opposite. I view that behavior as the person either preferring to avoid discussing a problem to maintain their own comfort at my expense or by exercising power that has no place in a healthy friendship by making me dance to her tune for an answer or by holding some apparent transgression over my head.  It's akin to someone giving you the silent treatment without telling you why they're not talking. That's not polite, that actually seems rather cruel to me.

If I have upset my friend in some way, I would much rather know what my mistake was so I can correct it or in some cases, decide if this friend and I are inevitably going to part due to some irreconcilable difference.  So if my friend is angry that I posted her photos on my FB, I need to know that for the long-term good of the relationship. If I know that, I won't do it again. I might think it's weird or proprietary or whatever, but if it's that important to her, I won't do it.  But if she won't give me an answer about why she won't share, then it becomes an issue in our relationship not because of the failure to share photographs but because of the failure to share the truth about OUR relationship.

 

I don't think it's about being a generous person or entitled person or anything like that. Of course people get to decide what they share and don't, but 'get to' doesn't encompass the other person's reaction. The right is to keep your property to yourself--not to have your friend have no negative reaction. I really think it is about the specific act of photography.

A non-photographer, like me, would expect photo-sharing on a vacation. That's how everyone's done it, and I'd be very surprised if someone wanted to keep the pictures all for them. But to someone who is seriously into photography, it's obviously different. The photographer might be really generous about other things.

I guess what I'm saying is I don't think it's accurate to characterize a photo-sharer as someone who feels 'entitled' to other people's work, nor a non-photo-sharer as a selfish person who is more concerned with what's theirs than a friendship. I think it's about how photography is framed. To some people, it's equivalent of that term paper--sure, it won't cause the photographer to lose anything by sharing it, but it's their effort spent. To others, it's more equivalent of one person knowing the local language and the other not--it just makes sense to share.

Neither view is necessarily *wrong*, but since it's clear from this thread that there are two distinct schools of thought, it might be better to figure out which your travel companions are.

I think you've hit the nail on the head here. Clearly some people view photography while on a shared experience in a far different way than others would. I've never had a friend or relative at a shared event refuse to share photographs and until this post, I'd never heard of anyone refusing to share (and I travel a LOT with friends and relatives). So I'd assume everyone would share and I'd plan accordingly. For example, I went with some friends to a large balloon fiesta. We spread out over the area, all of us taking photographs of different areas (or of the same area which came out differently due to camera strengths and weaknesses, etc). I didn't worry about, for example, getting the best shot ever of the Elvis balloon by fighting my way through crowds since I knew my friend was deep in the thick of that area and I trusted her to get the shot for the rest of us, just as the others know my better quality camera takes better low light photos than theirs do and so they didn't bother trying to get those shots. If my friend refused to share her Elvis balloon photos, I think it would have been a very bitter experience indeed, regardless of her "right" not to share.

[GrammarNerd]

I think the 'art' aspect is a red herring.  What if we substitute this scenario, taking the 'art' aspect out of it?

My nephew got one of these when he started college: http://www.livescribe.com/en-us/  It's a really cool pen thingie that has a voice recorder built in.  You use special paper and if you go to a certain section of your notes, the voice recorder will play what the instructor was saying in class at the time you wrote that section of the notes. 

These things aren't cheap, and there are other consumables that you have to buy, like the paper.  But he got it b/c he and his parents thought it would help him in his college courses, so they thought the investment was worth it.

So let's say he's taking a class with an old friend from high school.  Friend sees this funky pen and asks him about it.  Nephew tells him about how it works, etc.  They continue to hang out and attend class for a couple of months. Then come midterms, and the friend just assumes that Nephew will hand over his notes and voice recordings of the lectures so friend can study from them.  See, friend still attended class, but never took his own notes after he saw Nephew's cool new tool; he just assumed that Nephew would 'share' his notes because, you know, they're friends.  The classmate was still at the lectures, but Nephew had notes PLUS the voice recordings.  And it's not like it would cost Nephew any money to share, so why shouldn't Nephew share?

Well, to me, I wouldn't want to give my notes and recordings to the friend.  Friend had ample opportunity to take his own notes.  Sure, he didn't have the cool tool with the voice recorder, but he could have had it if he'd bought one for himself.  Nephew made the monetary investment in this tool, and he invested the time to learn how to use it effectively.  Just because Nephew has "better" notes, does that mean that he's obligated to give everything to the friend, just because he has the cool tool?

I think not.  The keys, I think, are the expectations by the friend that he could use Nephew's stuff and never even asked, and because of that assumption, the fact that the friend did nothing to help himself.  No, it costs nothing for Nephew to let the friend use his notes and tool.  But I don't think he has any obligation to do that whatsoever. 

Art or not, just because one person might invest the time and money in some equipment, it doesn't make the output from all of that into community property for all and sundry, even if they may have happened to have shared an event (vacation, class, etc.) with that person when he/she used the equipment. 

[miranova]

In fact, the only thing being stated in this thread on this side of it is that certain people would find the refusal odd.  Nothing more.  Yet words like "not obligated, not entitled, my property, my rights, my art" etc keep getting thrown around as if anyone is even remotely debating a photographer's right to keep their photos.  We all agree that it is your property and you can keep it. 

I think the only thing the travel companion did wrong was to expect the photos without asking nicely first.  I think anytime someone asks for something they do so with an expectation of at least possibly getting a yes, otherwise we would never ask anyone for anything!  So I don't think an expectation of probably getting a yes is wrong or "entitled", but I do think asking nicely is required.  Of course, he should take no for an answer and not push.  But I can understand why this didn't go down well, since the OP herself admits that she had a hard time giving a straight answer.  When someone won't give a straight yes or no answer, it is frustrating for everyone involved.

No we don't all agree.  Here several posters said they'd let the friendship cool if they couldn't have the pictures. I think I can extrapolate from that they feel entitled to them.

We are talking about how someone would FEEL if their friend refused to share travel photos with them, not whether they actually think that they have a legal right to them. The two are not even remotely the same thing and I have not seen one person argue that the photographer literally MUST hand them over.  If I have missed that, please point it out.  I don't think the exrapolating you are doing is accurate.

No-one's talking about legal rights. The very fact of asking someone for something implies that you feel like you should be able to have it, otherwise, as someone said earlier, you wouldn't have asked.

So asking for anything = feeling entitled to have it? One should never ask for a recipe, favor, copy of a photo, anything? If I ask a friend to pass me the canapes, it means I am being entitled?

In my social circle, it would be assumed that photos of a shared event are meant to be shared as well. In fact, I think the OP should have been the one to warn her friend, "You have to take your own photos, since I am not going to be sharing mine."

Yeah I am definitely with you on this one and don't know where all of the unkind accusations of other motives are coming from.  My thought was actually very similar to yours, that in the context of a friendship we ask for things that are normal and natural things to ask for, unless we are, in fact, special snowflakes.  But in the context of a normal friendship, we do ask each other for favors with some normal expectation that the answer might be yes.  This is not in any way saying that we feel 100% entitled to a "yes" answer, just that we may be taken aback for a moment.  Speaking only for myself, I would be taken aback, because I'd be wondering "what about my request was offensive?  Did I offend my friend in some way?" not "wow how dare she say no!  I'm entitled to those photos!"  Unfortunately, those of us trying to explain our view are being accused wrongly of the 2nd attitude even when we've never displayed it.  I do not feel entitled to my friends photos, nor to her clothing, food, or anything else. 

However, if, in the context of a friendship where I have feely given these things when asked, I would wonder why seemingly all of a sudden, a normal request is being denied with no reason given whatsoever.  And it would be even more frustrating that my friend couldn't just give me a straight yes or no answer.  Not because I'm entitled to the photos themselves, it's not about the photos at that point. It's about wondering what I'm missing here because it certainly seems like a normal request.  In real life, the friend didn't have the luxury of reading through 11 pages of reasons why the OP might not want to share the photos.  He has no idea why they aren't being shared, and while he may not be strictly entitled to an explanation, I see that as neither here nor there in this case.  I do not owe my friend a trip to the airport, but if she asks me and I can't do it for whatever reason, I sure as heck and going to say more than "um...maybe later, I don't know, not sure, we'll see", etc.  I'm going to answer, and if the answer is no, I DO think a good friend deserves a simple reason why not.  It's a relationship thing, not strictly an etiquette thing.  I don't want my friends thinking that I am just unwilling to do favors for them at all.  So if they ask a reasonable favor that I can't/won't/don't want to do, I'm going to give them the courtesy of at least explaining so they are not left wondering what they did wrong.

[CakeEater]

In fact, the only thing being stated in this thread on this side of it is that certain people would find the refusal odd.  Nothing more.  Yet words like "not obligated, not entitled, my property, my rights, my art" etc keep getting thrown around as if anyone is even remotely debating a photographer's right to keep their photos.  We all agree that it is your property and you can keep it. 

I think the only thing the travel companion did wrong was to expect the photos without asking nicely first.  I think anytime someone asks for something they do so with an expectation of at least possibly getting a yes, otherwise we would never ask anyone for anything!  So I don't think an expectation of probably getting a yes is wrong or "entitled", but I do think asking nicely is required.  Of course, he should take no for an answer and not push.  But I can understand why this didn't go down well, since the OP herself admits that she had a hard time giving a straight answer.  When someone won't give a straight yes or no answer, it is frustrating for everyone involved.

No we don't all agree.  Here several posters said they'd let the friendship cool if they couldn't have the pictures. I think I can extrapolate from that they feel entitled to them.

We are talking about how someone would FEEL if their friend refused to share travel photos with them, not whether they actually think that they have a legal right to them. The two are not even remotely the same thing and I have not seen one person argue that the photographer literally MUST hand them over.  If I have missed that, please point it out.  I don't think the exrapolating you are doing is accurate.

No-one's talking about legal rights. The very fact of asking someone for something implies that you feel like you should be able to have it, otherwise, as someone said earlier, you wouldn't have asked.

So asking for anything = feeling entitled to have it? One should never ask for a recipe, favor, copy of a photo, anything? If I ask a friend to pass me the canapes, it means I am being entitled?

In my social circle, it would be assumed that photos of a shared event are meant to be shared as well. In fact, I think the OP should have been the one to warn her friend, "You have to take your own photos, since I am not going to be sharing mine."

(It's funny, I have a friend who almost the opposite situation happened to. One of her in-laws set herself up as the group "photographer." She actively discouraged anyone else from taking pictures. But then when she sent out the photos, she spalshed her watermark all over them, rendering them useless for the group, who wanted to use them for portraits, christmas cards, etc.)

An entitled person assumes they should have everything. But we are entitled to have many things. You are entitled to eat the canapes, so asking for them is fine. Your friendship means you are entitled to ask for favours in a way you wouldn't be from a stranger. I think you are entitled to ask for a copy of a photo under many circumstances. I don't think you are entitled to ask your photogapher friend to hand over 650 images.

[buvezdevin]

For me the reasonableness of the request/demand to share photos (aside from the distinction between a "request" and a "demand") is also related to "scope".

OP's friend asked that OP share her photos by downloading all.

OP agreed to share photos, did share selected photos, but did not choose to provide her total files, I.e. met the request but reframed the scope.

Friend's - or anyone's - objection to OP's position should not be framed as "OP did not share" but "OP did not comply/meet the request for giving copies of all OP's photos taken during a shared trip."

I mention this point because it seems "off" to me to state the matter strictly as "share" or "not share" when the crux in OP's case is more a question of what are the views as to selective sharing when someone asks for "all photos" and the photographer is willing to share "some photos."

I posted my view earlier that I would have responded and felt as OP did, and while my personal view is not changed, I have been interested in the variety of views presented. 

[Firecat]

I don't think it's about being a generous person or entitled person or anything like that. Of course people get to decide what they share and don't, but 'get to' doesn't encompass the other person's reaction. The right is to keep your property to yourself--not to have your friend have no negative reaction. I really think it is about the specific act of photography.

A non-photographer, like me, would expect photo-sharing on a vacation. That's how everyone's done it, and I'd be very surprised if someone wanted to keep the pictures all for them. But to someone who is seriously into photography, it's obviously different. The photographer might be really generous about other things.

I guess what I'm saying is I don't think it's accurate to characterize a photo-sharer as someone who feels 'entitled' to other people's work, nor a non-photo-sharer as a selfish person who is more concerned with what's theirs than a friendship. I think it's about how photography is framed. To some people, it's equivalent of that term paper--sure, it won't cause the photographer to lose anything by sharing it, but it's their effort spent. To others, it's more equivalent of one person knowing the local language and the other not--it just makes sense to share.

Neither view is necessarily *wrong*, but since it's clear from this thread that there are two distinct schools of thought, it might be better to figure out which your travel companions are.

Actually, with the term paper example, that's not entirely true. Where I work, if you turn in someone else's paper, and it gets caught, both people involved can be penalized severely, if it's found that the originator of the work allowed the second person to use it in that fashion. It's academic dishonesty, and it's heavily frowned upon, to put it mildly. Maybe that's why I take a more severe view of the OP's friend than some appear to be - not only was my DH a professional photographer who would be very unhappy about such a "request" from pretty much anyone, but the friend previously posting the OP's photos without credit is pushing my "dishonesty" buttons. Because to me, that's dishonest as well as rude. So to me, the only thing the OP did wrong was not being straightforward when the demand was made.

[MariaE]

I completely agree with miranova - especially her last post. I don't think the OP was wrong not to share all her photos. I don't understand it, but that's something else entirely - I both accept and respect it 100%. I do think she was wrong to a) attempt to beandip rather than say no outright and b) not explain her reasoning. That is what would make me consider cooling a friendship - not the refusal, but the fact that I'm apparently not even worse a refusal or an explanation. It wouldn't be a tit-for-tat "she won't give me her photos, so I won't be her friend, so there!" but rather a "Huh... Looks like we're not as close friends as I thought we were."