|
Forums >
General Industry >
Legal rights with parks and street photogrpahy
Iâm trying to understand the legal rights of photographers in certain situations and would appreciate any feedback that might be helpful. Iâve already read the information posted on Krages website (www.krages.com) and probably will purchase his book. In the meantime, though, I still have a few issues to resolve. 1. Shooting in public places â I live near a large national park and have been stopped by rangers there for taking photos of models. They told me I needed a permit if I was a professional. I told them I was not professional, and it took awhile for them to believe me because I had a nice new digital SLR, a couple of lenses, and a reflector. The ranger asked, âOh, you just HAPPEN to have all this gear?â I explained that many hobbyists have nice gear. He went on to explain that being âprofessionalâ meant anybody who would derive income, directly or indirectly, from the use of the photos. For example, if I posted a photo taken at the park on my MM port and someday was paid by another model to do a shoot with her, it could be argued I derived income indirectly from that photo. Similarly, if the model used the photo to generate modeling work, it could be considered âprofessional use.â The ranger was quite intimidating at first, but, after chatting about 15 minutes, he was friendly enough to even tell me where to find the best places to shoot in the park at that time of day! Of course, the model and her husband were quite alarmed by the whole incident, and I certainly donât think it made me look good. To avoid future problems, I might just buy a permit, but I am worried about encountering problems in other places. For example, one of my friends told me you need a permit just to put a tripod down anywhere in New York City. Is it true? 2. Shooting people on the street â I love the idea of street photography but have always been a bit afraid to shoot strangers for two reasons. First, I worry about my legal right to do so. Second, I worry about some angry person coming after me to take my camera and or give me a knuckle sandwich or worse! I try to be unobtrusive and respectful, but Iâve already had people more or less harass me. Plus, there is the issue of entire groups of people who do not wish to be photographed. Am I allowed to shoot anybody on the street and what can I do if harassed? I searched the forums for other threads on this issue and found very little. Any meaningful feedback would be appreciated. Oct 03 06 09:32 am Link Oct 03 06 09:42 am Link Thanks. I also found good info about national parks at the following sites: http://www.photopermit.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8 http://www.largeformatphotography.info/ … parks.html http://www.largeformatphotography.info/ … #pl106-206 Now I just need more info on street photography. What if a person comes after me telling me I cannot take their photo? Maybe they weren't even the subject but were in the background of a photo of somebody else. Maybe this street stuff is not as pertinent to a site like Model Mayhem, except to the extent one is shooting a model on the street. So, what about shooting models on the street? Can I put a tripod down on NYC streets? Use lights? Oct 03 06 10:01 am Link My understanding is that cities, states, or other governmental bodies overseeing public property can levy usage fees for all kinds of activities as a form of taxation. It has nothing to do with the rights associated with the final product as it does with private property owners. In other words, if you get away with it, they can't stop you from exploiting your rights over the imagery. When I shoot on public lands without a permit, I always say that I am practicing for a class or something. I have had situations in other countries where they have stopped me from shooting just because I was carrying around a large lens.  Oct 03 06 10:13 am Link Dave S wrote: There *are* tripod restrictions in NYC... though they specifically cover tripods, so if you get a monopod or a rig you won't have to deal with them. Oct 03 06 10:35 am Link Back about a year perhaps a little longer I read a new story about public parks/national parks. A fee would be required to shoot if you are a professional. Although I must admit how they determine that is a bit vague. But I guess if you show up with a dozen models, assistants, MUAs, stylist, portable lighting.....it might be a hint. But just one person taking photos of another person....even with their boyfriend or your assistant....don't see how that would or should bother anyone.....like you mentioned after talking with the park ranger he got friendly. I took some shots of model drapped across a police car a few year back.....you should see how friendly and cooperative the two cops were as she revealed legs the cleavage.....they even turned on the red flashing lights for some very nice time expsoures.....oh yes,...I did send them each a copy.....they loved it! Oct 03 06 11:21 am Link James Jackson wrote: Street work. Oct 03 06 11:54 am Link i have 10 years experience at street photography. its very complicated , but you have half the idea down . regardless if your right or wrong someone can beat you down . if you start snapping pics of my kid id beat you down like it aint nothin. what you need to do is walk up to the group 2 people or more and ask the mans permission. example , a saw a cute 3 year old girl with a baloon playing on the sidewalk one day. i was walking down the sidewalk. her mom was sitting in the driveway , i asked if her husband was home she went and grabbed him. i asked him permission he sayed sure , i got a couple with her and her dad to prove he knew i was taking pics of her. than he left and the mom supervised i ended up getting 36 pics and they where adorable. you get the dads , boyfriends , husbands permission first. thats how you keep from getting beat up. the couple pic in my port is from street photography. Oct 03 06 09:24 pm Link darkfotoart wrote: That is the most archaic, backwater, male chauvinist, and plain rude thinking I've ever heard. Between this and your story of running to get "a woman" when you see a child in danger rather than helping yourself I think that most people in society should stay very very far from you. Oct 03 06 09:56 pm Link Make an appoiintment with the head Ranger or whoever handles the press: Explain what you are doing and more than likely will be fine. She/He will give you a couple of business cards and you throw the name when asked about it in the future. When the boss says it is okay , it always is. Specially in a National Park. Joe P.S. buy the Annual pass (Tax Deduction) and make yourself known at the park. Once you become a common face at the park they leave you alone. Oct 03 06 10:02 pm Link Joe Alcantar wrote: I have to agree here... I wanted to go up north in the rim country here in Arizona. There are some wonderful creeks, streams etc... with alot of water, rocks and foliage... Oct 03 06 10:21 pm Link James Jackson wrote: i agree with asking the male (father), beacuse it is the male (father) that feels the need to be the protector. but if its a couple i'll as both of them... if its a group of people i'll ask the "biggest" one in the group. Oct 03 06 10:29 pm Link I shoot in the National Parks all the time. As of July 1, a Permit is required for all commercial photography within National Parks. In addition, a fee can/will be charged for additional services provided by the National Park Service. The basic application fee for a permit is $200. It covers the photographer, one "assistant", one camera mounted on one tripod and a single vehicle. Photography must be during regular park hours, at locations accessible to the general public and require no assistance from NPS staff (such as closing traffic). Additionally, the photogrpaher must provide a copy of their liability insurance in the amount of $1 million naming the NPS as an additional insured. Additional services such as traffic control, additional people, access to non-public areas, access before or after normal park hours, requires payment of additional fees. Oct 03 06 10:40 pm Link There have been a number of extremely good answers to this question. Namely discussing the implied relationship between you and the person on the street. I do a LOT of street photography, but in LA, it's easy. Public places are clearly defined and people are used to celebrity photojournalists (paparazzi) snapping away with high end gear. In the south, public shooting is kinda tricky. If you follow the "sexist" advice of asking the male permission you'll usually end up with quality results. Ignore the criticism he received for saying that and be realistic about this culture we live in. Even if it is sexist, it's the reality of the US and men in general. As for the East Coast, I'd follow the same approach but be more aware of WHERE you are. NY in particular, as you've asked about, is covered with public places right next to private property. You'd be amazed what the City and State of NY consider public and private. Fortunately, getting a photography permit through most of Manhattan is relatively easy. Swing by Times Square and you'll find at least 4 pro's shooting at any one time. Ask them what they did, politely...it IS New York after all, and you'll get a better idea. Some of the handiest little things I ever got my hands on were my memberships with a number of wire services. You can cough up a LOT of respect as a member of the press, and every once in a while you shoot something that gets published. Big perks. With regards to getting your ass beat...I'd suggest you get your hands on a VERY STURDY BAG you can get your camera into easily. I've been on the end of some jerks who thought they had some right to privacy in the middle of a city park; its much easier to deal with them once you've got it stashed and you're not holding your bread and butter in your hands. Don't think it won't happen to you! There's a very well established trash rag photog who carries around little business cards with the local laws regarding public photography. Maybe he's onto something? Oct 03 06 10:50 pm Link Let me tell you what it can take to shoot on federal park land if they want to push it. You need to pay for a permit if they give you one, need to have a ranger supervise you while you shoot, can be required to post a bond and show liability insurance and they can still deny you a permit for content. I was a park ranger and worked for the forest service land use department. Remember there are fewer rangers in the spring and fall. Oct 03 06 11:02 pm Link James Jackson wrote: well i tell you what , walk up to a couple and ask the girl if you can take her picture in mich. and see what happens. if you get legal consent from a mom and her husband gets pissed she can say you ( pressured ) her into it. consent and escort needs to come from a male figure. i guess experience speaks for itself. and inexperience throws insults Oct 04 06 07:11 pm Link it may be sexist , but do a private shoot with 1 or 2 girls all you want. i wont , you cant be accused of anything if the boyfriend/husband is there. of course ive only photographed 1,000+ people i met on the street over 10 years. currently im undefeated in street photography by any club / group / individual. ive gone out in 1 hour and got 36 pics of a beautiful girl. reality is , i wont even shoot an adult male model without an escort so there thats how backwater i am. Oct 04 06 07:22 pm Link 7 Bates Studios wrote: Oct 04 06 07:26 pm Link Amoor wrote: Oct 04 06 07:29 pm Link i made certain wrong assumptions about james jackson please ignore anything i had said about him , i am coming from a perspective of going into a public place and photographing a single person. i am also in a very harsh social climate where you need to watch your actions. Oct 04 06 07:50 pm Link Public parks. Since they are owned by the public, everyone owns the right to use them. In other words, you don't need a release for a picture of a mountain. However, note that this is different from taking pictures of costumed re-enactors at a public park. The fee thing is just a revenue generator, not unlike the way the Federal parks began charging for parking some years back, and does not relate to your rights to images. I'm not sure what the fee structure is. But, I'm pretty sure that the $200+insurance thing is for when you are hauling in a van load of equipment. Fact is, things have changed where if you are in a Federal park and up a mountain in need of airlifting out due to a broken leg, you will be presented with a bill for the helicopter, which is considerably more than $200. The license fee in Philly was $25/yr. There is also the issue in public parks of more than one party wanting to conduct a massive project in the same place at the same time, which is why it's a good idea to coordinate with the rangers. Street photography. The key issue is identifiability. If the picture is of just one house, you need to get a release. If the picture is of a house on fire, it may be considered a newsworthy event, which is the same thing that movie stars are covered under when it comes to the paparazzi (public right and need to know). But, if it's a scene where no particular piece of property nor one particular person is the subject matter of the photo, that's fair game. It's the difference between taking a shot of one person vs. a crowd. ESPN does not get releases for everyone sitting in a stadium, nor do they have to. Also, permission to take a picture and permission to publish a picture are two separate things. In the State of New Jersey, there is another one to watch out for. Due to milk carton paranoia, even if a tyke is in a crowd and in a public setting, it is illegal to take pictures of that kid without permission of the parents beforehand on the grounds that you might be a potential kidnapper. For more recent stuff, due to rules from the Department of Homeland Security, you are not allowed to take pictures in train stations. For international stuff, there are LOTS of other rules. For example, technically, in France and Argentina, it is illegal to take pictures in a graveyard on the grounds that it disrespects the dead. I don't know how the picture of Jim Morrison's tombstone gets past that one. Maybe it's due to celebrity status. Oct 04 06 07:53 pm Link Dobias Fine Art Photo wrote: Reading all this it to me boils down to a catch 22 on whatever you do. I would just say know your local laws for where you are shooting and dont argue with authorities if they want to infringe upon "i have a badge". I was shooting at Jones Beach this past week and the fuzz pulled up to me on the beach and said to just stay away from the dunes cause it was a conservation area for wildlife(ahem dont know where they are) and for my model to just not to remove the bottoms of her swimsuit. He was saying topless is cool just not the bottoms. I was like why did he say all that because she was fully clothed not even doing implieds or shooting nude. But what the hell, she did implieds later on in the shoot anyways, lol. I think for wherever you shoot, just use discretion as in not to offend onlookers to go call authorities depending on what you're shooting. Oct 04 06 08:26 pm Link I ran into this problem once. I photographed a model for a gothic-oriented magazine. She wanted to be photographed in one of the local Baltimore cemetery's (Greenmount for anyone who knows the area). They told me that I wasn't allowed if the photographs would be for profit because it included shots of the cemetery which was city property and a historical site. Well, the shots weren't going to make her money, it was a for a local magazine that was actually just advertising the clothing she was wearing which was made by a local seamstress/designer. But I hadn't realized before that, that this was something that perhaps I needed to become more aware of. I understand parks and such, but what about just random photos of city culture? I have an entire portfolio dedicated to Baltimore City that doesn't include any models, but just scenery of the city and certain buildings. Nothing that I plan to make money off of it's just my own personal port. If it's just for personal pleasure do the rules still apply? Oct 04 06 08:59 pm Link Dave S wrote: If you drove into the park in an expensive, sporty-looking car, would the rangers just assume you were a professional race car driver? Makes about as much sense. Oct 04 06 09:23 pm Link darkfotoart wrote: You just proved yourself to not know anything and to make the most moronic statements without evidence ever. Oct 04 06 09:31 pm Link rp_photo wrote: Dave S wrote: If you drove into the park in an expensive, sporty-looking car, would the rangers just assume you were a professional race car driver? Makes about as much sense. True, but they canât charge a fee for driving an expensive car. James Jackson wrote: James, relax, I for one found his statement rather funny in a sophomoric way. Oct 04 06 09:43 pm Link NewBoldPhoto wrote: Yeah, sorry, I get a little wound up sometimes Oct 04 06 09:54 pm Link What about shooting in the National Forests? Oct 04 06 10:04 pm Link ADGibson wrote: National Forests and all lands policed by the National Parks Dept. have the same rules and the same requirements. Oct 04 06 10:20 pm Link NewBoldPhoto wrote: At least for the good news side, there is no Federal law against nudity. In other words, State Parks, nudity => probably not. Federal Parks => nudity Ok (within reason - it's one of the things rangers like to patrol on horseback). Oct 04 06 10:23 pm Link |
