Harassed by security guard in mall..

[NickTrop]

So many years ago I was taking a stroll with my two nephews and son to a store to buy ice cream. A short-cut was to cut through this outdoor area of a nearby hospital that separated two of the hospital's buildings (for lack of a better phrase). There was a bench there. I asked the kids to set on the bench and I took their picture. I think I was using an old folder at the time. Some nasty old lady security guard comes over giving me grief.

What are you doing?
I'm taking a picture of my son and nephews setting on a bench, obviously.
That's weird (she says)
I replied, it's quite normal ma'am, but I'm sure it seems weird to you as I doubt anyone wanted to take any pictures of you growing up.

I was in a local diner owned by Asians. I took a picture of their cook in their kitchen with my new-to-me Yashica Electro CC who was visible through a service window. The owner -- a small but feisty Korean lady who owned the joint, was "displeased" and started yelling at me 1/2 in English, 1/2 in Korean. I gave her the roll of film to calm her down. That was rather a scene.

Finally, I took a pic of a street vendor's wares who chased my down the block. Another semi-scene. She was ranting about posting her designs online. Didn't have time to explain it was an old film camera.

 

[p.giannakis]

Harrased? Since then asking not to take pictures of business property became harassment?

It depends where you stand. Inside their business like in a mall, they have a legal basis. Outside of it taking pictures of it, it is harassment.

 

[Dan Daniel]

So many years ago I was taking a stroll with my two nephews and son to a store to buy ice cream. A short-cut was to cut through this outdoor area of a nearby hospital that separated two of the hospital's buildings (for lack of a better phrase). There was a bench there. I asked the kids to set on the bench and I took their picture. I think I was using an old folder at the time. Some nasty old lady security guard comes over giving me grief.

In the US, hospitals have serious concerns for patient privacy rights. Some related to HIPPA regulations, some other legal obligations. I've had a couple of very pleasant encounters with hospital security staff who explained their concerns and issues. They even gave me phone numbers to call if I wanted to get permission. Sounds like you were dealing with someone either poorly trained or simply an a***ole.



And for reasons I do not understand, many people seem to see a "real" camera as 'official.' So, say, a restaurant owner can be worried that you are an inspector gathering evidence of code violations or a journalist doing the same.



Again and again I've had Asian restaurant owners object to me doing photography even near their places. Finally one day someone was yelling, Why do you photograph this?? Go photograph something pretty!!! Which snapped me into realizing that there was a serious cultural difference at work. To many people, the only reason to photograph something like a restaurant kitchen is to record something wrong. The idea of wasting time and/or film on such places for 'art' or whatever makes no sense to many people, so the reason you would photograph a kitchen is only to file a complaint.

 

[robert blu]

Many answers here but not much about the logic of "photos not allowed if taken with a camera but allowed if taken with a phone" 🙂

robert

PS: I just heard by the radio an advertising of a known phone manufacturer advertising his phone with 4 (you imagine the brand!) cameras inside...things get complicated...😀

 

[NickTrop]

In the US, hospitals have serious concerns for patient privacy rights. Some related to HIPPA regulations, some other legal obligations. I've had a couple of very pleasant encounters with hospital security staff who explained their concerns and issues. They even gave me phone numbers to call if I wanted to get permission. Sounds like you were dealing with someone either poorly trained or simply an a***ole.



And for reasons I do not understand, many people seem to see a "real" camera as 'official.' So, say, a restaurant owner can be worried that you are an inspector gathering evidence of code violations or a journalist doing the same.



Again and again I've had Asian restaurant owners object to me doing photography even near their places. Finally one day someone was yelling, Why do you photograph this?? Go photograph something pretty!!! Which snapped me into realizing that there was a serious cultural difference at work. To many people, the only reason to photograph something like a restaurant kitchen is to record something wrong. The idea of wasting time and/or film on such places for 'art' or whatever makes no sense to many people, so the reason you would photograph a kitchen is only to file a complaint.

All fair points I hadn't considered. In the case of the hospital grounds, there was an area between two building that had a little outdoor waiting area with a bench. Wasn't in the hospital itself. But the person was probably not trained properly. And an a-hole.

I hadn't considered your point about the restraunt owner thinking I wanted to record something... good point.

Yes -- using a "strange" professional camera does give the impression to the uninformed that you're doing something official. Who walks around with these things anymore?

 

[willie_901]

he told me if i wanted to take pics to use my phone. did u miss that part?

This is common. I have been to several events where DSLR's with large lenses were forbidden. All bags were inspected by security when you entered the venues. I was allowed to attend with a Zeiss Ikon M at one and FUJIFILM X-Pro 1 or 2 cameras (no zoom lenses) at the others.

I assumed the security staff was trained to look for pentaprisms and large zoom lenses. I also think a local photography business had obtained rights to photograph these events. There would be one person with an event badge using a huge Canon DSLR kit. I haven't attended these for the past 8 years. But even back then I felt cell phones destroyed any pretense of exclusivity. People making cell-phone photos of friends and family participating in the events would not be buying any images from the phtographers' web sites.

 

[willie_901]

Me being the smartass that I am, I would have whipped out my IPhone and started taking pictures through the eyepiece of my camera. That probably would have annoyed him....

Or, provided them with the satisfaction of ordering you to leave their property immediately or be charged with trespassing.

 

[willie_901]

I worked at The Washington University Medical Center. I always had a camera with me. The HIPPA regulations were vigorously enforced.

Every so often I would find a pair of latex lab gloves on an outdoors sidewalks that had fallen off a lab cart used to transport experimental materials between labs. I always made a photograph of these abandoned gloves. One evening when I stepped outside the lab building there was a pair of gloves laying on the sidewalk of a public street. I took a couple of photos. A hospital security guard told be to stop. I knew I was on public property. So, I politely told the guard I was within my rights; made one more photograph and went on my way. He made a radio call. But that was the end of it.

I worked in an imaging research center. Occasionally there were famous patients such as Christopher Reeves (Superman), members of Middle Eastern Royal families, etc. We always knew when one of these was on site because every elevator and stair well access point was manned by a security guard to ward off paparazzi.

The campus had a lot of public art work. One summer day I was photographing on campus when a surprise shower popped up. I took shelter in the lobby of the nearest building – St. Louis Children's Hospital lobby. The receptionist saw my camera and immediately told me to leave unless I had an ID. I did. She said you can stay but you can't use your camera. Of course I agreed.

 

[kuuan]

It depends where you stand. Inside their business like in a mall, they have a legal basis. Outside of it taking pictures of it, it is harassment.

Happened to me a few years ago in Osaka, Japan. A "designer" store sure thing did make their shopfront very attractive, so I took out my camera, right out there on the pedestrian way, on the street. Immediately 2 staff rushed towards me from the inside, frantically doing their "crossing of their arms in front of their chest", Japanese sign language to say, rather to shout "You can’t do that”, “Stop whatever you are doing".

They ran up to me all the way outside their store and, for Japan very surprisingly aggressively told me that photography was forbidden. I smiled at them friendly and told them rather resolutely that it was my right to take as many photos out there on the street as I wished, that they had no way of prohibiting me and if they did not wish their shop front to be taken photo of from the street they better covered it. To demonstrate, to their utter horror, I again raised up my camera and took a few photos.

 

[Larry Cloetta]

Many answers here but not much about the logic of "photos not allowed if taken with a camera but allowed if taken with a phone" 🙂

robert

Hi Robert,

Generally, the current crop of rules don’t allow for any kind of photography, whether cell phone camera or dedicated camera. As noted before, security forces are more likely to go after people with camera cameras than people with cell phones simply because people walking around with their cell phones out are ubiquitous and it’s too hard to tell if they are taking pictures or just....whatever. People with camera cameras in malls, on the other hand, are singled out for selective rule enforcement simply because they are low hanging fruit.
So, it’s not about the logic of the rule, but the illogic of the enforcement regime.

But here’s something which Paul Harvey might have called “the rest of the story”: I was in a small, local, family owned jewelry store a couple of years ago, having walked in there with a camera around my neck. It’s a place that specializes in Native America jewelry, one off creations by local artists and artists in Arizona and New Mexico, some pieces of which are highly elaborate and original, all of it very expensive. I’ve been in there many times, but this time I noticed a new sign by the front desk which said simply “no cameras allowed”. I know the owner, and pointed to my camera with a questioning expression. She said, “You’re okay”, and explained that they had started having problems with men from mainland China who walked into her store and others on the block, methodically walking from display counter to display counter taking photos of all the jewelry, then leaving without a word. She said that 6 to 9 months later exact copies of these one off pieces began showing up online, made in China. She’s had the same exact thing happen more than once, as have others here, apparently. Then she pulled out a notebook of photos of her pieces next to the Chinese knockoffs on alibaba. So, sometimes, there are specific, valid reasons for the policy.
And, no, she won’t let people pull out their cell phones either🙂

 

[robert blu]

...
And, no, she won’t let people pull out their cell phones either🙂

Thanks for your words Larry, yes I fully agree there can be many reasons to forbid photography in some places, as to prevent to copy specific pieces of work. Or at least to make it more difficult.

But in this case photography should be forbidden regardless of the tool, camera or phone.

It happened once to me and when the owner of the shop ask me not to photograph his shop window (the colors in it were beautiful!) I simply said ok, no problem, I don't.
He was kind to me, not rude or aggressive and I tried to be kind. I only said going on "but I have a photographic memory!" and we both laughed about!

Another story about a friend of mine whose passion was to photograph shop windows of fashion stop. He had a beautiful collection of various shops in the years and you could see how fashion evolved in the time. Interesting.

One afternoon he was in the most famous high fashion shopping street downtown Milan in front of the Moschino shop with his camera fixed on the tripod. Franco Moschino himself was arranging the final details of the window, going out and inside the shop. Of course he noticed my friend and had a short chat with him asking why he was photographing that window and before re-entering the shop gently asked my friend to wait "please at least" when the shop window was finished and perfect! No objection at all about the photo! But these was many years ago and the were different times!

robert

PS: sometimes I still like to take photo of some shop window but I always ask the owner if I am allowed to do it or not. Most of times they say yes, sometimes no.

 

[John Lawrence]

Of course many respondents here have missed the point that the security guard told me it was ok to take pics with my iphone...

To me, this is the most interesting part.

I'd hazard a guess that the iphone has become more socially acceptable than a conventional looking SLR camera, and that the security guard may have been more concerned with people reporting you to him for using it than the actual act of taking pictures. He probably thought that there would be less interest, consternation and reports to him if you just used your iphone for pictures - that seems to be what people expect these days.

Here photographing was not the problem - your choice of camera was!

John

 

[Larry Cloetta]

But these was many years ago and the were different times!

robert

That’s the complete answer explaining all of this, right there. Malls as an original, innovative and, in some ways, Disneyland-like concept, had no such rules.
They were different times.

 

[Huss]

Here photographing was not the problem - your choice of camera was!

John

Indeed. I think he had a bone to pick with Leica.
Perhaps he had an M9 that took 9 months for sensor replacement.

 

[John Lawrence]

Indeed. I think he had a bone to pick with Leica.
Perhaps he had an M9 that took 9 months for sensor replacement.

... these Leica haters are everywhere 🙂 !

Seriously though, it's getting quite weird shooting film and using 'traditional cameras' these days. I've heard of people being detained by security at airports because those checking their bags had never seen film before......



John

 

[robert blu]

... I've heard of people being detained by security at airports because those checking their bags had never seen film before......

John

And a camera without batteries is ...suspicious...maybe a fake just too hide something...😀

robert

 

[raid]

I have in mind to bring with me my M3 with the Hologon on it. Is this a "suspicious looking set"?

 

[p.giannakis]

I have in mind to bring with me my M3 with the Hologon on it. Is this a "suspicious looking set"?

My IIc with an Elmar was, so...

 

[Huss]

This is one pic I took at the mall, just before Paul Blart swooped in.

Leica R-E, Summicron 50 ROM, Fuji C200, Nikon Z7 scan, negativelabpro.com



Apparently, Barbie, you can't be a film photographer..

 

[David Murphy]

I was taking photos of my 3 y/o son riding the little mechanical "Choo-Choo train" at the Victoria Gardens outdoor mall in Southern California about two years ago. The camera was a Canon rangefinder (L3 or L1 I forgot). A security guard approached me and started questioning me. I asked him why and he told me he was worried that I would "take photos of buildings". He did not tell me to leave or stop taking photos, but he was clearly highly suspicious of me!

Later, while walking with my wife and son, I noticed I was being "tailed" by at least two security guards as if I was a major threat of some sort. I left shortly thereafter.

Victoria Gardens is a privately owned facility, but it blends in with with public streets and was developed in a close partnership with the city of Rancho Cucagamonga. The local police have a station there as well.

Another time I was confronted by the angry manager at a Baskin-and-Robbins Ice Cream Parlor for the crime of wearing a film camera around my neck (also a Canon rangefinder!). I was not taking pictures, I was waiting in line to buy ice cream with my older son at the time.

So maybe photography with film cameras is a crime!