NO PHOTOGRAPHY ALLOWED... do you obey?

At my place of employment, an electrical contractor accidentally fell from the roof (12 story building). He died of course. This happened just before I arrived at work. I pulled out my camera and attempted to photograph the scene (the body was already covered up). The Facilities Manager caught me and raised a stink.

Yes, I photograph where I'm not supposed to. I don't ascribe to the notion that corporate photography is benign and photography by individuals is dangerous and evil. I'm a photographer. Not a brilliant one, by any stretch. But philosophically.
 
I don't take photos if the sign that's posted is on private property and I'm on that property. That's their right and their privilege. The way I understand it, if you're on public property though (in the US) you can take a photo of anyone or anything, w/ some caveats for that "national security " B.S., which is simply another term for "we're illegally taking another of your rights away".

I was at a public event recently and got into a heated argument w/ one of the vendors over something like this. He had these little signs on his booth that said "No Photography". Well, he was outdoors in a public park during the middle of a public celebration. What sort of an idiot goes to something like that and expects no one to take photos? People were running around w/ cameras everywhere, but this moron (I am being overly polite here) thought that since he was renting his space he could arbitrarily make up his own photography rules. People like him are why we need laws to protect us. I told him to go and get a cop, I was going to take photos of anything as long as I was on public property, and I assured him the cop would say the same thing. I also offered to bet him $100 on the spot that I was right. He backed down at that point and asked me to please not take any photos. I think he was concerned about health food inspectors or something. I could care less though, and even went so far as to go get a cop, who said exactly what I had said. The Supreme Court made a really simple ruling on this. If you are in public, then you have no expectation of privacy.

Next time though I'm probably just going to move on. This guy was just nuts, now that I have had some time to think about it, and people like him are best kept away from you. Just agree w/ the nut cases and go on about my business, that's my new motto.
 
Last edited:
No loitering allowed. Do you obey?
No drinking and driving allowed. Do you obey?
No photography allowed ....

These are laws to be followed.
 
crawdiddy said:
At my place of employment, an electrical contractor accidentally fell from the roof (12 story building). He died of course. This happened just before I arrived at work. I pulled out my camera and attempted to photograph the scene (the body was already covered up). The Facilities Manager caught me and raised a stink.

Yes, I photograph where I'm not supposed to. I don't ascribe to the notion that corporate photography is benign and photography by individuals is dangerous and evil. I'm a photographer. Not a brilliant one, by any stretch. But philosophically.
Click to expand...

Excellent way of describing the situation.

I think under pretty much all circumstances photography should be allowed. I am not that interested in taking photos of a clean-up from a dead person but... someone saying no makes me want to do it.

Photography seems almost as important as free speech. I am opposed to censorship that leaves us at the mercy of corpratism. This is why in another topic I said we have a duty to keep up the pressure of making it "normal" to photograph and ignore over sensitive, low-self-esteemness that has swept the nation.

Private property vs. public, and rules are funny. I would think many of them would realize that you could swap on a telephoto lens and get the shot, but instead you chose to walk closer. Fact is it makes no sense and rules are not laws about this. First while the area may not be publicly owned, if it is open to the public there is no right to privacy. Their rule can only be used to make you leave. There can not legally be legal repercussion unless the sign postage is a city ordinance. How the rest of the world views it I dunno... blind folded, trust corpratism, and photography as an unnecessary hobby. The ladder being a batch of people that have no historical context of rights against oppression and the power of photography involved in movements...

The rule of police should be more universal and due to it not being so I see great oppression in circumventing photography. That rule being "you have nothing to worry about unless you are doing something wrong". Well unless someone is doing something wrong they should not be worried about being photographed... and if they are doing something you believe to be wrong to others, you should be able to hold them accountable with proof.

P.S. I do not like police but I hate double standards.
 
raid said:
No loitering allowed. Do you obey?
No drinking and driving allowed. Do you obey?
No photography allowed ....

These are laws to be followed.
Click to expand...

There is a great deal of difference between the consequences of driving drunk and taking pictures in a museum.
I would add that any society that enforces both enfrigements at the same level will soon enough have more car crashes and less pictures of them...

About Loitering, I didn't even know what it is about. had to search in wikipedia.
There are such deep differences between the meaning of behaviors in different society...it's amazing.
 
Gabriel At the Orsay Museum in Paris said:
That's really sad. This museum is real opportunity for the photographer.
One of the pictures of mine I like the most has been taken there.
What a pity...
Click to expand...
 
sanmich said:
Gabriel At the Orsay Museum in Paris said:
That's really sad. This museum is real opportunity for the photographer.
One of the pictures of mine I like the most has been taken there.
What a pity...
Click to expand...

Long ago, closer to when it opened, I shot video and stills there,- there was a great high location across from the clock, you could look down and shoot most of the museum's main hall from there.

Sometimes they make the rules simple for the people who are charged with enforcing them.

Regards, John
Click to expand...
 
I keep shooting until I am told otherwise then play dumb.....



5550720055_3411a10a80_z.jpg
 
I did obey in The Sistine Chapel in The Vatican Rome, but was aghast at how many people ignored even the stewards who kept shouting out instructions to "stop photographing" - Their shouts detracted completely from the beauty and what should have been the tranquillity of the chapel.

mangie
 
Haha I was at the Exposed exhibition at the Tate, ironically about this whole topic and took a photo after a friend dared me. I didn't want to but I did anyway. That's me and her in the pic. There was TV monitor and a huge black painting behind + some special xray thingy meant you could only see what was in the black painting on the screen.

4879914352_2eba69db85_z.jpg
 
Cool. Nice story. Keep shooting.
sara said:
Haha I was at the Exposed exhibition at the Tate, ironically about this whole topic and took a photo after a friend dared me. I didn't want to but I did anyway. That's me and her in the pic. There was TV monitor and a huge black painting behind + some special xray thingy meant you could only see what was in the black painting on the screen.

4879914352_2eba69db85_z.jpg
Click to expand...
 
This is very situation specific like many things in life. In general, I have no compulsion to obey those rules that seem to have no logical reasoning. I follow the "better to beg for forgiveness than ask for permission" logic most of the time. But in Cuba, the situation there dictates that I follow their rules no matter how illogical they are. Same for small towns in the USA where I don't want to spend 24 hours in jail to eventually prove I was right.

You just have to pick your battles.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom