The Ethics of Street Photography – Part 2

The Ethics of Street Photography – Part 2

As we discussed in Part 1, street photography is fraught with ethical tensions. Should we always ask permission before taking someone’s photograph? Is obtaining consent inherently the “right” thing to do? Do individuals have a right to privacy while in public? And what about the way people—and their candid moments—are ultimately represented or misrepresented in images? Do we, as street photographers, bear responsibility for how our subjects appear? These are important questions, and they only scratch the surface.

In this second part of my three-part series on the ethics of street photography, I explore three ethical frameworks—utilitarian, deontological, and relational—to see how they might guide us toward greater ethical awareness and inform our practice as street photographers.

Utilitarian Ethics: The Greater Good

A utilitarian approach to ethics holds, in its simplest form, that ethical actions are those which maximize happiness or minimize harm. If a photograph has the potential to inspire positive action or educate the public, then the benefits may outweigh the costs—even if consent is not obtained.

Documentary photography, which often overlaps with street photography, frequently operates on this premise. Seeking consent might be impractical or even impossible in certain situations, and doing so could hinder the production of work that serves the public interest. Consider, for instance, images that document poverty, injustice, or public protest—photographs that can galvanize social awareness and political change. From a utilitarian perspective, the value of these images may override the discomfort or lack of consent of individual subjects.

However, this stance is not without problems. Who decides what constitutes the “greater good,” and by what criteria? Utilitarianism also risks treating subjects as means to an end, which can lead to objectification or dehumanization as a result of the inherent abstraction. The photographer’s pursuit of a noble cause can unintentionally override the dignity of the individual.

Deontological Ethics: Rights and Duties

Deontological ethics, by contrast, emphasizes moral rules and duties over consequences. In this view, actions are right or wrong based on principles such as respect for persons and individual rights—not the outcomes they produce. A deontologist might argue that people have an inviolable right to privacy and autonomy, and that these rights must not be breached even for the sake of a greater good.

Copyright ⓒ Sally Davies

This can lead to a strict position: one should always seek consent before taking a photograph, regardless of context. While this approach strongly defends the subject’s rights, it also presents challenges for the genre of candid street photography, which depends on spontaneity and often unfolds in fleeting, unrepeatable moments.

Moreover, what about the rights of the photographer? Artistic freedom and freedom of expression are also important values. Where do these rights intersect—or conflict—with the rights of subjects? And in urgent, documentary contexts, can ethical reflection keep pace with unfolding events? The camera can be a vital witness to history, and sometimes the opportunity to record may vanish in the time it takes to ask permission.

Relational Ethics: Context, Care, and Connection

A third approach, relational ethics, suggests that ethical understanding arises from the nature of relationships rather than from abstract rules or calculations of outcomes. This perspective urges photographers to consider the connection—however brief or even nonverbal—between themselves and their subjects.

In this framework, a kind of tacit consent may emerge through shared space, mutual acknowledgment, or body language, all without necessarily breaking the candid quality of the moment. Think of the work of Vivian Maier, whose photographs often convey a subtle, unspoken intimacy.

Copyright ⓒ Sally Davies

Relational ethics encourages the photographer to remain attentive to vulnerability, empathy, and the potential impact of representation. Yet, this approach also carries risks. The idea of a “felt” connection can be easily imagined or misinterpreted, especially if the photographer is inclined to rationalize their choices. Without rigorous self-awareness, one might invoke “relationship” as a post-hoc justification for ethically dubious decisions.

Because relational ethics operates in shades of grey, it requires a high degree of humility, mindfulness, and ongoing reflection. It resists fixed rules and demands that we stay present to the unique dynamics of each encounter.

Toward an Ethical Practice

Perhaps the path to a more thoughtful and ethical street photography practice involves drawing on different frameworks in different situations. Maybe no single model is sufficient on its own.

As I prepare to conclude this series with a proposal for a more ethically grounded approach to street photography, I’d love to hear from you: How do you navigate these ethical challenges? What informs your practice?

Log on and comment below—let’s keep the conversation going.

Photos Curteosy of Sally Davies , Visit & Follow Sally on Instagram