ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
I like to do street type photos in local bars. People are generally well soused and go along with my hobby.
Recently one bar owner has told me not to take photos in his place.
So I comply. Mostly. But slip a few in under his radar.
Last night I was taking photos just for my 'Cigarette Machines' project, and he saw me, and told me to stop 'Because people don't like it'.
What people? I was photographing his cigarette machine. Not a person in sight.
Down the other end of the bar was a group of high school kids photographing each other. I mentioned this and he told me they were allowed because they were using mobile phones not proper cameras like mine.
I'm dazed and confused.
Recently one bar owner has told me not to take photos in his place.
So I comply. Mostly. But slip a few in under his radar.
Last night I was taking photos just for my 'Cigarette Machines' project, and he saw me, and told me to stop 'Because people don't like it'.
What people? I was photographing his cigarette machine. Not a person in sight.
Down the other end of the bar was a group of high school kids photographing each other. I mentioned this and he told me they were allowed because they were using mobile phones not proper cameras like mine.
I'm dazed and confused.
jbf
||||||
That's rediculous. :\
I would probably try to talk to him off hours about it. Sit down and explain to him that there's no difference and that you clearly ask people before you shoot their photo.
I would probably try to talk to him off hours about it. Sit down and explain to him that there's no difference and that you clearly ask people before you shoot their photo.
stuken
Established
I got hassled once in a mall for having my camera (nikon FM) around my wrist. I asked if they treated everybody with a cell phone camera or a little digital camera the same way. They said it was different because my camera was a "pro" camera. Sometimes, you just have to sit back, relax, and accept that most people are idiots.
N
nwcanonman
Guest
Jon,
Who can say why people do what they do?
But it is the man's private property, so I would simply not patronize his place in the future (JMHO).
There must be more inviting and accepting establishments that offer photo ops :angel:
Who can say why people do what they do?
But it is the man's private property, so I would simply not patronize his place in the future (JMHO).
There must be more inviting and accepting establishments that offer photo ops :angel:
Ororaro
Well-known
People are stupid sometimes.
People on the streets sometimes come to me and ask me what I'll do with the pictures. I say nothing but they reply that they think they will end on the internet. I then stop, keep silent for a few seconds and then I reply "So what if they end up on the internet?" And they reply: "you will sell them"?
I then laugh, ask them why in the world they'd generate a single penny and I watch them feel ridiculous.
Why is everyone on the streets scared to appear on the net? And why do they all think they're worth big money?
People on the streets sometimes come to me and ask me what I'll do with the pictures. I say nothing but they reply that they think they will end on the internet. I then stop, keep silent for a few seconds and then I reply "So what if they end up on the internet?" And they reply: "you will sell them"?
I then laugh, ask them why in the world they'd generate a single penny and I watch them feel ridiculous.
Why is everyone on the streets scared to appear on the net? And why do they all think they're worth big money?
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
Yes, people in bars often ask me to take a photo.
They know, because they are friends and neighbors, that I'll show up the next day and give them a print each.
I never make it explicit, but it's implied, that I'll use the photos myself later.
Did Cartier Bresson, and Koudleka, and Brassai ever get this too I wonder.
Anyway I'm still 'stealing' photos in Europa 4 when he's not looking and continuing in Planicie, and Regional, and Bolo Branco, and SoBica, and Santhiago...
They know, because they are friends and neighbors, that I'll show up the next day and give them a print each.
I never make it explicit, but it's implied, that I'll use the photos myself later.
Did Cartier Bresson, and Koudleka, and Brassai ever get this too I wonder.
Anyway I'm still 'stealing' photos in Europa 4 when he's not looking and continuing in Planicie, and Regional, and Bolo Branco, and SoBica, and Santhiago...
amateriat
We're all light!
Now there's a statement dying to be appropriated as a sig.stuken said:
On the one hand, it is his property, so he can call the shots as he wishes. On the other, I think he's being a tad overprotective, and I can't imagine, assuming he's a half-way reasonable person, that talking it over with him (over a pint, ideally) mightn't unfuffle his feahters a bit. Offer to make him a print or two that he can hang somewhere in the place (this has worked for me a couple of times). Make it known to him, diplomatically, that you're part of the scene, and not a mere interloper.
I'm toying with the idea of doing a series of photos in two of my fave watering hole/performance spaces, one here in the Slope and one in lower Manhattan (I've already done some shots there of my favorite music duo in one of them, so I have something of an "in" already).
Oh...medium format! I've worked with it now and again, and while I do appreciate the things it does better than 35mm (detail and tonality), I've never been able to make the leap. By this, I'm not talking some all-or-nothng nonsense, but the big thing for me is that, when I'm heading out the door with photography on my mind, I'm not at all into thinking about choosing film formats. I'm not even into thinking RF vs. SLR, one reason why I mostly gave up the latter. It's really a matter of what fits the gestalt of my vision (pointless exercise: somebody do a search and find out how many times I've used the word "gestalt" on RFf, an whether I'm the only person here to do so
).Of course, if a Makina 67 fell into my lap from out of the blue, I'd certainly put more than a few rolls though it.
- Barrett
Last edited:
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
Perhaps I'll take the Rolleicord (Art Deco edition) into his bar and he won't even think its a 'proper' camera.
Toby
On the alert
ClaremontPhoto said:
Whether you agree with the bar owner or not it's his property and his livelihood and so you should simply respect his wishes. If there are plenty of other bars to shoot in what's the problem?
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
Toby said:
No there's no problem. I just went in there for a coffee and cake and he's perfectly friendly. He even gave me the morning newspaper to read first before anybody else.
It's just that I find his camera phobia a bit odd.
So I respect his wishes when he's out front, and only photograph when he wanders off backstage to make a sandwich or whatever.
Jamie123
Veteran
Next time he complains just hold the camera to your ear and tell him "Can you give me a second? I have to take this call."
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
When we do street don't we often either do it stealthy or 'ask' with our eyes and gesture.
If somebody clearly says No with their eyes and body language I put the camera down right away.
If somebody clearly says No with their eyes and body language I put the camera down right away.
wgerrard
Veteran
Get a shot of those "high school kids" and send it to the bar's liquor licensing agency.
sjw617
Panoramist
stuken said:
nb23 said:
Wow, you guys really know how to make friends. If they wind up on the internet, shouldn't you have releases from these people since you are really 'publishing' them? People see many sites that manipulate things and embarrass people. They do not wish to be that person. Many people are private and do not appreciate having their privacy invaded or feeling harassed. There are also a great fears of terrorism, kidnapping, pedophilia, etc. in today's society.
If the owner requests you to stop you should or you run the risk of being banned. If you think you have a feel when people say yes on no with their eyes, why do you have such a hard time when they say it with words?claremontphoto said:
Steve
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
sjw617 said:
They say Yes or No for themselves to be in the photo. Bar owner says No Photography of anybody. Big difference.
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
memphis said:
Hot girls do whatever they want in there. No limits.
Middle-aged men cannot take photos of other middle-aged men. A weird hobby in itself but not as weird as some goings on.
jan normandale
Film is the other way
Jon, since you've shot there before and now are being asked to stop I think you should ask the owner if a patron has said something to him. Some people won't confront you but will ask others to do so. Especially in a commercial / retail business setting.
Just a thought. I'd also expect him to deny it even if someone has asked him to have you stop shooting in the bar.... long / short; I'd find a new bar, he's only going to get more perverse as time marches on.
Just a thought. I'd also expect him to deny it even if someone has asked him to have you stop shooting in the bar.... long / short; I'd find a new bar, he's only going to get more perverse as time marches on.
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
He's a fat old guy aged beyond his years and enjoys greasy food and has disgusting personal habits.
Maybe he'll be gone soon and his charming wife and daughter will assume ownership.
Maybe he'll be gone soon and his charming wife and daughter will assume ownership.
Toby
On the alert
ClaremontPhoto said:
Okay, my viewpoint maybe skewed as I used to own my own bar, but a bar is private property - you are only there because the landlord allows you to come in and while you are there you must abide by his rules - he probably thinks that some guy taking photos will put off his customers and cost him money. That's a valid point of view that you should respect - whether you agree with it or not. You certainly shouldn't 'just take photos when he's not there'. You said there are lots of bars in your locality - so go to another bar and shoot there if they don't mind - pretty straight forward.
crawdiddy
qu'est-ce que c'est?
My employer has a placard at the security desk at each entrance to the facility, stating that all cameras are forbidden, including cell phone cameras.
This might have been realistic 5 years ago. But these days, there are very few cell phones without cameras, and it's absurd that people should not bring their cell phones to work. Most people use them for business as well as personal use, don't they?
The stated reason for the ban is to prevent photography of sensitive documents. This in itself is ALSO absurd. What kind of resolution/lens do you need to actually copy documents? Certainly, it can be done. But it also attracts a lot of attention, and would require a lot of time, multiple exposures, good lighting, etc. And why wouldn't a spy simply email the softcopy documents anyway? Peoply do that all the time.
I suppose the real purpose of the ban is to be able to punish someone who breaches security or confidentiality using a camera. But it does so by creating a rule which will only be enforced selectively.
To take the absurdity to yet another level, the CEO held a "town hall" type meeting recently, and while he was speaking, one of the corporate PR guys gets up and photographs the speaker (with a Barnack-vintage Leica and collapsible Elmar). This was probably done at the request of the CEO, who turns out to have a photography "hobby." The CEO just published a book of portraits of homeless people. He states that he gave them a few bucks to take their photos, and that proceeds from the book go to homeless charities. My coworkers have speculated whether the photo subjects were former employees, laid off in the very frequent Reductions In Force. So anyway, the CEO is a do-gooder in his spare time, cutthroat anti-labor capitalist during business hours, and apparently he has a high tolerance for irony.
OK, sorry about the rant. I suppose I just wanted to agree with the sentiment that some people are just idiots.
This might have been realistic 5 years ago. But these days, there are very few cell phones without cameras, and it's absurd that people should not bring their cell phones to work. Most people use them for business as well as personal use, don't they?
The stated reason for the ban is to prevent photography of sensitive documents. This in itself is ALSO absurd. What kind of resolution/lens do you need to actually copy documents? Certainly, it can be done. But it also attracts a lot of attention, and would require a lot of time, multiple exposures, good lighting, etc. And why wouldn't a spy simply email the softcopy documents anyway? Peoply do that all the time.
I suppose the real purpose of the ban is to be able to punish someone who breaches security or confidentiality using a camera. But it does so by creating a rule which will only be enforced selectively.
To take the absurdity to yet another level, the CEO held a "town hall" type meeting recently, and while he was speaking, one of the corporate PR guys gets up and photographs the speaker (with a Barnack-vintage Leica and collapsible Elmar). This was probably done at the request of the CEO, who turns out to have a photography "hobby." The CEO just published a book of portraits of homeless people. He states that he gave them a few bucks to take their photos, and that proceeds from the book go to homeless charities. My coworkers have speculated whether the photo subjects were former employees, laid off in the very frequent Reductions In Force. So anyway, the CEO is a do-gooder in his spare time, cutthroat anti-labor capitalist during business hours, and apparently he has a high tolerance for irony.
OK, sorry about the rant. I suppose I just wanted to agree with the sentiment that some people are just idiots.