Illegal, or just flat nuts

I was recently out photographing a unique old barn. I took a few shots and then drove around exploring the area for more interesting photographs. I came back later to the same barn later hoping for some better light. I didn't see a whole bunch of potential but I took out the camera and shot a few more frames. I was just leaving when a pickup approached me at a high rate of speed. The middle aged woman in the truck asked me what I was doing. I said I was taking a couple of photographs, she said, "uh, uh, this is private property". I said I was on a public road, and she told me it didn't matter that was her family's barn and I couldn't take photos of it, and would I please delete the photos I had taken. I was a bit taken aback and complied with the request with the photos I had just taken. What are my rights with this? I thought as long as I wasn't trespassing(public roads)it was legal to take photos of houses, barns etc.

Try reading these:

http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm

and

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/columni...y-rights_x.htm

Roger

For the UK chaps try this

http://www.sirimo.co.uk/ukpr.php

Roger

I believe you are in the right. If you were going to use the images commercially, then you would need a release from the owner of the property. But even then, I don't think it's that big of a deal. The common public perception is that you cannot photograph them or anything of theirs without permission. This is wrong. You just can't profit off the images I think is the deal.

Rick

She's nuts. :)

yeah. she is. I love when non-photographers think they know our rights.

maybe they were drying pot in that barn ...

Thanks for the PDF files Roger, they'll come in very handy. I thought I was in the right when I took those shots, since they weren't very good I didn't really mind deleting them, the photos I took earlier were much better. After I complied with her request she became very friendly and chatted with me about my job, people I knew in the area, and even told me to go talk to her mom(the farm in question)and she would probably give me permission(that I didn't need)to photograph her farm.
I was photographing in the Matanuska Valley in Alaska. The area was colonized during the depression in a government program. There are large mountains(sea level to over 8,000 feet) and many many farms and barns around. I could spend a month there taking photographs. Unfortunately my work will take me in and out of places like that pretty quickly and I find myself back in Fairbanks. I'll get back there I'm sure and I'll be armed with a few copies of the PDFs I was provided.

There have been several cases in France where owners have sued postcard manufacturers and magazines because they published images of things on their private property. The silliest was the case of the extinct volcano in the Auvergne region.

After some hesitation the courts have finally judged against the owners in all cases, and even ordered them to pay costs. A victory for common sense. The pictures were all taken from public areas. If it had been from within private property then it would have been quite different.

Note that when the subject is a person, the law is quite different. Private property is like hallowed ground. If you publish a picture of someone on private property without getting a model release then this might actually be a criminal offense. It's invasion of privacy.

next time smile and wave as you go home WITH YOUR LEGALLY TAKEN IMAGES. People are crazy, which is why I shoot nature :D

Or better yet... reply" did you see that bigfoot near the barn, I got proof on my camera"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paulnj

next time smile and wave as you go home WITH YOUR LEGALLY TAKEN IMAGES. People are crazy, which is why I shoot nature :D

Or better yet... reply" did you see that bigfoot near the barn, I got proof on my camera"

---

:D LOL!

Great thread, I'm learning a lot! it's true, when confronted with someone like that you begin to have doubts about what your rights actually are--this is good info to know.:)

Yeah, I am a bit of a joker at times :wink: Crazy people need crazier answers sometimes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by walterick

I believe you are in the right. If you were going to use the images commercially, then you would need a release from the owner of the property. But even then, I don't think it's that big of a deal. The common public perception is that you cannot photograph them or anything of theirs without permission. This is wrong. You just can't profit off the images I think is the deal.

---

Yup, my understanding anyway. Every image could probably be argued in favor of one side or the other and that's why there are courts. Obviously you wouldn't want to end up there because the amount of money you make from an image even if you're clearly in the right won't go far to offset legal fees. Paul has a good point...

As I said, different situations have different rules - for example, if you shot a city skyline would you need a property release from the owner of every recognizable building? Don't think so...

This reminds me of when I was at the airport in Atlanta, GA a few years ago. I got off the shuttle bus and was going to have quite a wait for my next flight. The security guard informed me that photography of any kind, was not allowed at the airport. I didn't know any better, so I complied. If I had read this before hand, I would have told him to kiss my butt.

So far, I've pretty much been left alone, but I've printed out THE PHOTOGRAPHER'S RIGHT, and will have it with me at all times.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minnesota scroller

This reminds me of when I was at the airport in Atlanta, GA a few years ago. I got off the shuttle bus and was going to have quite a wait for my next flight. The security guard informed me that photography of any kind, was not allowed at the airport. I didn't know any better, so I complied. If I had read this before hand, I would have told him to kiss my butt.

---

It's a good thing I didn't see that same security guard, I've been through Atlanta a couple times this year and took pictures both times without anyone saying anything. In one case, I did ask the gate agent if it was OK and they consented.

I also heard from an acquaintance that you cannot take pictures of the Eiffel tower at night due to copyright restrictions. Any truth to this? How does that play into this whole argument?

PC

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PrevailingConditions

It's a good thing I didn't see that same security guard, I've been through Atlanta a couple times this year and took pictures both times without anyone saying anything. In one case, I did ask the gate agent if it was OK and they consented.

I also heard from an acquaintance that you cannot take pictures of the Eiffel tower at night due to copyright restrictions. Any truth to this? How does that play into this whole argument?

PC

---

Maybe another photographer was told the same thing as me and challenged it. That would make them rethink their rules.

As far as what I just read and printed, not being allowed to take shots of the eiffel tower at night is a lot of bunk. Maybe someone is just trying to get a monopoly on Eiffel Tower postcards. :idea:

Quote:

---

People are crazy, which is why I shoot nature

---

Yep, never had a tree or beach ask me to delete. I just don't play nice with crazy.

Perhaps a French person can comment as the laws in France are different to the US and UK laws.

I believe that the company that did the lighting did copyright the display in some way. Not sure of the impact of this on stills.

Roger

Of a situation that happened on last year's LA Gathering... I was going to take a photo of a street hustler playing the shell game (or was it 3 Card Monte?) and he, along with his "bodyguard" insisted I didn't have the right to do so.. Not wanting to push the subject, I backed off. The hustler broke up his "game" and moved to a new location.

On the same trip, PJ attempted to take a photo of a couple potential drug pushers, one of which was happy to display his goods in the photo. Unfortunately his other friends kept him from having his photo taken. Too bad too.. The shot PJ almost got would have been a classic.

And the most frightening experience I had while attempting a photo on a public street happened when I was in NYC for yet another Gathering.. I was walking from my hotel to John's Pizza to meet up with all the others attending the Gathering. As I entered Times Square, there was a large group of black men gathered on a corner. They had set up a small stage and were spouting some pretty serious hate speak. They were all dressed in an interesting fashion and I raised my camera to snap a photo of the man addressing the gathering crowd.. He saw me with the camera and he went off on me. He made comments about not being an animal in a zoo and that I had no right to photograph him.. He went on for a good 5 minutes, spewing his racial rhetoric and all I wanted to do was slip away and go meet my PR.com friends and hoist a couple beers.. Those of you here that have met me know that I'm not a small man.. By the time I was able to get away, I was honestly afraid for my life. There were many in the crowd that was from his group and I truly felt they were going to put a beat down on my white arse..

I don't think a copy of the Photographer's Rights would have helped me much in that situation.. :yikes:

Great thread! Thanks for starting it.

On a related note, for those that haven't seen it, here's a thread I just posted about the changing legalities of shooting in NYC...

http://forums.photographyreview.com/...ad.php?t=34067

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kokopeli

I don't think a copy of the Photographer's Rights would have helped me much in that situation...

---

I'm with you there - think about it. Someone or a group of people decides you're in the wrong. You whip out a little piece of paper that could have just as easily been written by you, the one doing something wrong. Has anyone outside of a fairly small group of photographers ever heard of Bert Krages? Probably not.

It's good to read what he says, and I don't doubt that he's correct on all of his counts. Just know your rights. You can either walk away, ask to see that person's boss, or call the police. From a practicality standpoint, eventually you'd have to look at the hassle vs. what you can get photographically from the situation. However, I understand it's a matter of principal...

On a side note, one of the best street photographs I've ever seen was taken by someone who used to live in Chicago. It's not on his website anymore, but was a shot of a man who was spreading the word of his religion (rather obtrusively, as I remember). He didn't want his picture taken, so when he tried to cover the lens with his hand, a photograph was made that showed his angry face and bible thru the spaces between his fingers. Powerful stuff...

Brian, those are the biggest biggots I have ever seen! I have been harrassed by them a few times, but I am not scared of racial banter .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paulnj

Brian, those are the biggest biggots I have ever seen! I have been harrassed by them a few times, but I am not scared of racial banter .

---

I'm not afraid of racial banter either. It was the fact that I was surrounded by a large group of racists being whipped into a frenzy by the words of their "leader" that concerned me.

Regardless, the ordeal made for great conversation ofer pizza and beer. :thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EOSThree

I was recently out photographing a unique old barn. I took a few shots and then drove around exploring the area for more interesting photographs. I came back later to the same barn later hoping for some better light. I didn't see a whole bunch of potential but I took out the camera and shot a few more frames. I was just leaving when a pickup approached me at a high rate of speed. The middle aged woman in the truck asked me what I was doing. I said I was taking a couple of photographs, she said, "uh, uh, this is private property". I said I was on a public road, and she told me it didn't matter that was her family's barn and I couldn't take photos of it, and would I please delete the photos I had taken. I was a bit taken aback and complied with the request with the photos I had just taken. What are my rights with this? I thought as long as I wasn't trespassing(public roads)it was legal to take photos of houses, barns etc.

---

You were right, she was wrong. Too bad you didn't tell her to get bent!