http://www.saulgallery.com/chronicle...2013.htm#check
This guy's work has an interesting backstory and raises all sorts of ethical moral first amendment issues, but what is really most unusual about it, is that it is really lovely, beautiful work.
I didn't see that coming.
The gallery describes his work as voyeuristic, but I think they are just being lazy. The thing that is fascinating about it is that it doesn't come across as voyeuristic and more then Hopper's Nighthawks at the Diner does.