Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I've been into photography as a hobby for many years. I like landscape scenics a lot especially. I also like to take "silly snaps" of everyday life. I was photographing my lunch or dinner back in 2003 before Instagram made it a thing, ha ha. I'm a male aged 44 married with 2 kids.
Today we ventured out to a privately-managed but publicly-accessible lake today, one we had not been to before. Our niece was also with us. As it typical of me, I took shots of everything around me, and also tried to get some good scenic landscapes of the lake.
Then, it happened.
The owner came up saying some people had been complaining about me making them uncomfortable with my walking around taking photos around me. I was NOT aiming at anyone's butt or such, I was just snapping at whatever was around, and in fact if any given shot had the tendency to be predominately women in their bathing suits, I typically aimed around them somewhat if they were close. It was the sort of shots I've taken numerous times over the years.
I explained that to the owner, and when they asked that I basically only take photos of my own family and nothing else, I said nicely "I will not deliberately seek out anyone by face or such, but I'd like to be able to take general scenics, and if it happens to include someone in it, that's nothing to be worried about." I did also, though, express to them that as the owners of the place they could make up whatever rules they wanted to & I understood that their priority would be making people feel comfortable and that if they were asking me to leave period I would do so. They didn't, but nonetheless didn't seem altogether happy with the "I'd like to be able to take general scenics" remark, but walked away. I then continued taking photos as I had been.
Later some teen was asking me about my photos and saying that he did not appreciate me taking any photos of his family etc. I told him I was NOT trying to take any of them, I had no such interest, that if they happened to be included in general scenics I couldn't help that and that I couldn't possibly be expected to ask every single person if it was okay to take such shots. I also told him he had no reason to worry. His response was basically that he WAS going to worry and that if I took any shots with his family in them he would "ph-u-ck me up." (He didn't make it obvious who these people were, how could I avoid them anyway?) I told him that attacking me would be assault and thus illegal and I would press charges, whereas public photography is NOT illegal, and that frankly it wasn't my problem that he was so worried over nothing anyway.
Later the main owner showed up and told me that if I wanted to continue to visit in the future I would need to all but take no photos of anything at all. I tried, again, explaining that I meant no harm, and when he saw my wife and asked if he could talk to her, I was like "sure, go ahead she'll tell you that I take photos all the time and that people even have paid me to photograph their kids" (they actually have). This STILL didn't placate him, and worse, a person with him was rambling on about how people had seen me asking young girls to take my video. Yes I had, I told them, I was jumping off the pier and wanted a video of me doing that but my wife wasn't close and it's not possible for me to film myself jumping off a pier. I asked, they had no problem, and if they had seemed not okay with it, I most certainly would've apologized and dropped it on the spot. And besides all that, what business is any of that of a bystander anyway? (The bystander was NOT the parents of the teens, just a bystander period.) I also told the owner how the one person had threatened me & how maybe he should consider saying something to him with regards to how you don't go around threatening people. He didn't seem particularly concerned.
When all was said & done the owner was pretty much adamant about that if I were to return I'd pretty much have to take no photographs of anything, not even my own kids doing their thing, and certainly not "scenic overviews." I explained to him that would not be okay, that in fact they had cabins there & I had considered renting one soon, and that if I did naturally I'd be taking photos on my vacation there, such would be natural--but that if I were to be huddled-over constantly to make sure I was taking no photographs, I would have no interest in any such accommodations. So basically we can't go back there anymore.
I realize fully a property owner can forbid photography on their premises. That said, I'm really getting sick & tired of we male photographers being assumed to be perverts in such situations. It is getting really ridiculous. To me it's out & out racism. A side of me wanted to just play along since the kids liked the place so much, and heck this issue aside I did also, but to me this is an issue that's too important to compromise over. Also, if the owner was going to totally back the other persons even after I & my wife had explained my photography background & skills and after I told him of the physical threat that the person made to me, then I wouldn't want to be around such a person's place anyway.
(On a side note, they're selling the place, and apparently someone has been in talks with them about possibly buying it, so maybe they'll have new owners at some point & I could maybe try again.)
What are your observations? Should I have just played along & figured that whoever the complainer was probably wouldn't be back next time we returned & it would be a non-issue at that point? Also, have any of you experienced any such thing?
To sum up: the owner asked you to stop taking pictures of anything but your family. You acknowledged his right, as the owner of the private property you were on, to set and enforce whatever rules he wanted about photography on his property. But then you continued to shoot however you wanted. I'm sorry but I think that was disrespectful, not to mention technically illegal. I think the owner was relatively reasonable and kept his cool even though you blatantly ignored his legal right to request you stop taking the photos you were. Even those "photographer's rights" cards will tell you that if a property owner tells you stop taking photos, by law you must comply.
Yes, the teenager was way out of line by threatening you - you could have reported it to the police. And yes, it was unfair that you were being treated like a criminal when you weren't doing anything wrong. But it IS private property and the owner DID ask you to stop and you didn't comply. The owner could have had you thrown off the premises and banned entirely. Instead, he just asked that if you ever return, you do not take any photos at all. He sounds like a pretty reasonable guy who was just trying to make his guests feel safe and comfortable, which is understandable.
In my opinion, the best course of action when taking photos on private property is to gain permission from the owner (or someone with authority) in advance whenever possible. Had you gone to see the owner when you arrived and explained to him what you wanted to photograph and that you'd be happy to show him all of your photos when you're done so he could see nothing inappropriate was taken - and perhaps even offer to give him copies of any photos he thinks he could maybe use for promotion/advertising of the place - maybe this whole thing could have been avoided. With permission from the property owner in advance, any complaints could have been smoothed over. The owner would have probably told them "The photographer is here with my permission and I can assure you he is not taking any inappropriate photographs."
Of course, you run the risk of the owner saying "no" before you've shot anything but that is their right and you have to respect it. But this guy sounds pretty reasonable and probably would have been okay with it had you just come to him first.
Quote:
That said, I'm really getting sick & tired of we male photographers being assumed to be perverts in such situations. It is getting really ridiculous. To me it's out & out racism.
Racism? Neither photography nor being male is a race - I think the word you're looking for is sexism. And yes, I agree that male photographers probably get the worst end of this stick. But as I've said before, I do know a petite female photographer who was once harassed so it's not only males who get it.
The thing about it is this--it's my observation that in recent years people have become extremely way touchy about someone taking photos in public, as if they're a potential terrorist or pervert, especially if the person is a male going solo. I guess they've watched too much "Dateline NBC" or Nancy Grace. I've heard many of them assert that you have no RIGHT to take any photos in public that happen to include them in it, even if it's by coincidence, unless you get their permission. They really believe that.
It's really poisoning our society somewhat. I mean, here I am, at a lake, a very small low-key and quiet one at that, and all I'm trying to do is simply snap photos of my life as I've done numerous times over the years and as is a most natural thing to do. It's not like I'm in the buildings in Washington DC that forbid photography for national security reasons and have long done so (I recall going to Washington DC for a trip in 7th grade back in the 1980s & not being allowed to take photos in the US Treasury building or whatever, the same went for the building which houses the original US Constitution having such rules). It's a small quiet lake with pretty & interesting scenery for crying out loud.
Frankly, it's just impossible for me to respect something like that. I just can't. I'm not saying I would go there and do like I please knowing ahead of time what the situation is, but I'm not going to respect it either in terms of going to such a place & then being made to do something so stupid. These idiots (not the owner, the one who complained) can't be allowed to win this war, it's just too wrong. Understand--I most certainly won't return there, even if they allow me to (assuming the same rules apply). I don't intend to go around there & be a trouble maker. I said my peace to them, I'm gone, I won't return and be a distraction.
My thing at the time was simple--I'm already here, I've driven almost 2 hours to get here, it's just a small freaking lake in a town of like 1500, & it's not the owner has such a rule so much as they were asking "on the fly" because of the idiot complaining. My thought was simply that I wasn't going to let that one idiot get in the way of something like this as long as I was already here. That said, the owner wasn't demanding that I stop on the spot or else, he was more like that I needed to understand that if I chose to come back AGAIN that would be asked of me, was that okay, I said "no," so he did allow me to "finish out the day" as it were vs having me leave on the spot, so I just carried on as long as I was there. Maybe the better response was to say to the owner "I know you're trying to make guests feel comfortable, but I'm sorry, that's a ridiculous request based on paranoia & I'm not going to honor it, so I'm leaving right this minute," then in fact left immediately, and left it at that.
You say the guy was reasonable, but frankly--and maybe I'm thinking more idealistically as a photographer vs customer satisfaction & business as he would understandably be--but to me, once it was established that I was just a "Japanese tourist" type of snapshooter not trying any "upskirt" photos and such, & that in fact I'm pretty darn skilled at what I do at least on occasion, I think he should've told the person how ridiculous they were being and to get over it. If I were the owner--I know I'm not--but if I were, that's what I would've done. I'd told the person "he's not harming anyone, you're making a big fuss over nothing, I'm not going to tell that nice gentlemen he can't take photos because you're being overly sensitive." Frankly, they need to be told that--maybe in nicer words than that, but they do need to be told that. A person throwing a fit over an individual taking snaps in public is just silly. It ought not be catered to, not even if it costs someone money.
But like I said, I won't be going back and causing a scene, and again, not even if they ALLOWED me back but with those stipulations. A person like me doing no one any harm shouldn't be told to put their camera away just because someone has schizophrenia-caliber delusions about what I'm doing. What I do intend to do is mail them a letter (they're so quaint they don't even have email that I can tell) explaining my stance & asking that they reconsider, and also showing some of the photos I've taken that show what my style of shooting is. Maybe--unlike, but MAYBE--they'll gain an appreciation for it.
To sum up: the owner asked you to stop taking pictures of anything but your family. You acknowledged his right, as the owner of the private property you were on, to set and enforce whatever rules he wanted about photography on his property. But then you continued to shoot however you wanted. I'm sorry but I think that was disrespectful, not to mention technically illegal. I think the owner was relatively reasonable and kept his cool even though you blatantly ignored his legal right to request you stop taking the photos you were. Even those "photographer's rights" cards will tell you that if a property owner tells you stop taking photos, by law you must comply.
Yes, the teenager was way out of line by threatening you - you could have reported it to the police. And yes, it was unfair that you were being treated like a criminal when you weren't doing anything wrong. But it IS private property and the owner DID ask you to stop and you didn't comply. The owner could have had you thrown off the premises and banned entirely. Instead, he just asked that if you ever return, you do not take any photos at all. He sounds like a pretty reasonable guy who was just trying to make his guests feel safe and comfortable, which is understandable.
In my opinion, the best course of action when taking photos on private property is to gain permission from the owner (or someone with authority) in advance whenever possible. Had you gone to see the owner when you arrived and explained to him what you wanted to photograph and that you'd be happy to show him all of your photos when you're done so he could see nothing inappropriate was taken - and perhaps even offer to give him copies of any photos he thinks he could maybe use for promotion/advertising of the place - maybe this whole thing could have been avoided. With permission from the property owner in advance, any complaints could have been smoothed over. The owner would have probably told them "The photographer is here with my permission and I can assure you he is not taking any inappropriate photographs."
Of course, you run the risk of the owner saying "no" before you've shot anything but that is their right and you have to respect it. But this guy sounds pretty reasonable and probably would have been okay with it had you just come to him first.
Racism? Neither photography nor being male is a race - I think the word you're looking for is sexism. And yes, I agree that male photographers probably get the worst end of this stick. But as I've said before, I do know a petite female photographer who was once harassed so it's not only males who get it.
IF people didn't look for shock value on Reddit or Thumblr, or Flickr, or Facebook etc etc etc.................you, and I and anyone else with a camera would not have this problem. Facebook forced to respond to violent sexist images | CNET UK
You don't know what photos these people are using...they can pick up someone lying on the beach, and Photoshop it however they want...you can't stop them, hence taking photos in public has become a no, no even though it might not be illegal now, it will soon be thanks to these unscrupulous people. Remember one person who doesn't read the manual on how to fold a stroller, they get hurt, and blame the manufacturer??? same thing...one idiot will ruin it for everyone else. The rest of my answers on this are in the link above. I am not typing them again.
That can be a town that values its privacy, or is one full of criminals that don't want themselves advertised anywhere. Where were you going to POST these photos? and who was your audience? that matters a lot.
Quote:
it's just a small freaking lake in a town of like 1500
Quote:
Originally Posted by larrytxeast
The thing about it is this--it's my observation that in recent years people have become extremely way touchy about someone taking photos in public, as if they're a potential terrorist or pervert, especially if the person is a male going solo. I guess they've watched too much "Dateline NBC" or Nancy Grace. I've heard many of them assert that you have no RIGHT to take any photos in public that happen to include them in it, even if it's by coincidence, unless you get their permission. They really believe that.
It's really poisoning our society somewhat. I mean, here I am, at a lake, a very small low-key and quiet one at that, and all I'm trying to do is simply snap photos of my life as I've done numerous times over the years and as is a most natural thing to do. It's not like I'm in the buildings in Washington DC that forbid photography for national security reasons and have long done so (I recall going to Washington DC for a trip in 7th grade back in the 1980s & not being allowed to take photos in the US Treasury building or whatever, the same went for the building which houses the original US Constitution having such rules). It's a small quiet lake with pretty & interesting scenery for crying out loud.
Frankly, it's just impossible for me to respect something like that. I just can't. I'm not saying I would go there and do like I please knowing ahead of time what the situation is, but I'm not going to respect it either in terms of going to such a place & then being made to do something so stupid. These idiots (not the owner, the one who complained) can't be allowed to win this war, it's just too wrong. Understand--I most certainly won't return there, even if they allow me to (assuming the same rules apply). I don't intend to go around there & be a trouble maker. I said my peace to them, I'm gone, I won't return and be a distraction.
My thing at the time was simple--I'm already here, I've driven almost 2 hours to get here, it's just a small freaking lake in a town of like 1500, & it's not the owner has such a rule so much as they were asking "on the fly" because of the idiot complaining. My thought was simply that I wasn't going to let that one idiot get in the way of something like this as long as I was already here. That said, the owner wasn't demanding that I stop on the spot or else, he was more like that I needed to understand that if I chose to come back AGAIN that would be asked of me, was that okay, I said "no," so he did allow me to "finish out the day" as it were vs having me leave on the spot, so I just carried on as long as I was there. Maybe the better response was to say to the owner "I know you're trying to make guests feel comfortable, but I'm sorry, that's a ridiculous request based on paranoia & I'm not going to honor it, so I'm leaving right this minute," then in fact left immediately, and left it at that.
You say the guy was reasonable, but frankly--and maybe I'm thinking more idealistically as a photographer vs customer satisfaction & business as he would understandably be--but to me, once it was established that I was just a "Japanese tourist" type of snapshooter not trying any "upskirt" photos and such, & that in fact I'm pretty darn skilled at what I do at least on occasion, I think he should've told the person how ridiculous they were being and to get over it. If I were the owner--I know I'm not--but if I were, that's what I would've done. I'd told the person "he's not harming anyone, you're making a big fuss over nothing, I'm not going to tell that nice gentlemen he can't take photos because you're being overly sensitive." Frankly, they need to be told that--maybe in nicer words than that, but they do need to be told that. A person throwing a fit over an individual taking snaps in public is just silly. It ought not be catered to, not even if it costs someone money.
But like I said, I won't be going back and causing a scene, and again, not even if they ALLOWED me back but with those stipulations. A person like me doing no one any harm shouldn't be told to put their camera away just because someone has schizophrenia-caliber delusions about what I'm doing. What I do intend to do is mail them a letter (they're so quaint they don't even have email that I can tell) explaining my stance & asking that they reconsider, and also showing some of the photos I've taken that show what my style of shooting is. Maybe--unlike, but MAYBE--they'll gain an appreciation for it.
What you should do is not assume that you as a non paying visitor can take photographs "just because that's what you do"
Then you should respect the owner's request and quit taking photographs when he asked you to.
Then you should have waited for your wife to be closer before having girls you have never met take a video of you jumping off a pier. That pier was not going anywhere and you could have waited for your wife.
Before any of this though you should have gotten WRITTEN PERMISSION from the owner BEFORE you clicked that button one time to take a photograph. That way he is aware of what you are doing and you have proof in writing that you have been given permission to take the photographs.
The ONLY letter you should be writing to the owner is one of apology and toss in a thank you for him not calling the police and having you arrested for trespassing and some sexual deviant related charge because you involved two girls in your photograph taking and they were probably minors.
My road ends at a lake. I frequently go there to photograph birds, especially the flying seagulls that are only there in the winter. I do it from my car. People come to feed the gulls, ducks and geese. So, sometimes the people are in my photos. I don't sell my photos and my galleries are unlisted to the search engines. If there were no seagulls there I could care less about the people. In fact, I wouldn't even be there since the lake scenery is so blah in winter.
One February day, a young couple (early 20s I'd guess) arrived who began to feed the seagulls from the small sideless dock by throwing the food up in the air to have the gulls catch it. I was in my car at a distance (300mm zoomed to the max) and started to snap some photos. All of a sudden the guy leaves the girl and goes to his car. I'm thinking he's going for more food. Remember, I'm really only interested that the feeding is making masses of gulls fly around them. He returns with a boquet of roses. Then he drops to his knee and apparently pulls out a ring and slips it on her finger. She's facing in my direction, he's holding her hand, she's looking at her new engagement ring and her expression is one of surprise. Now I start snapping photos of them. No one else is around. I'm so excited that I am witnessing a proposal that I forget to take my camera off of shutter priority. I got about 12 photos of them, about 5 of the proposal and the rest of them feeding the gulls. Then they start to walk to their car so I quickly drive over to it before they drive off (since they were kissing, I had a little time ). They roll down the window. I congratulate them, get their name and tell her I got everything on camera (and why). I hope the photos are decent and if she would give me her e-mail address, I will send them to her. She gave it to me.
When I was driving home I remembered it was Valentine's Day.
10 of the photos were quite nice despite that I was on Shutter Priority. I e-mailed them to her and she sent me a nice thank you e-mail in response. I'm thinking, what girl/woman has photos of her surprise marriage proposal? Think of what she can show their future children, their friends and their parents.
I'm also thinking...if I was a guy instead of a 58 year old woman, would the response at the car have been the same? I'm not sure but kind of doubt it.
While the OP could have perhaps handled the situation better (as has been pointed out, it is private property, and the owner is perfectly within his/her rights to ask the OP to not take pictures/not return with a camera), this rubs me the wrong way:
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhotoProIP
You don't know what photos these people are using...they can pick up someone lying on the beach, and Photoshop it however they want...you can't stop them, hence taking photos in public has become a no, no even though it might not be illegal now, it will soon be thanks to these unscrupulous people. Remember one person who doesn't read the manual on how to fold a stroller, they get hurt, and blame the manufacturer??? same thing...one idiot will ruin it for everyone else.
That can be a town that values its privacy, or is one full of criminals that don't want themselves advertised anywhere. Where were you going to POST these photos? and who was your audience? that matters a lot.
Taking photos in public has become a no no?? Your argument seems to be that one bad photographer might do something bad with public photography, so we should all stop public people photography? "One idiot might ruin it" for us, therefore let's voluntarily ruin it ourselves first by stopping public people photography? It doesn't matter why I want to take pictures in public or for whom (commercial uses aside). The more we give in to these paranoid ideas about privacy in a public place, the more we will lose our ability to shoot normally and freely in public. Unless I misunderstood your point.
Now again, I'm not saying that we should be belligerent about shooting in public even though we may be in the right. A few weeks ago I was asked by a London Underground agent to stop shooting inside the Tube station since photography was prohibited. I knew she was wrong but instead of starting a fight, I informed her that I'd looked up the rules and it was allowed. She said that I'd need to talk to the station manager. I could have just asserted my right and argued with her or just left (and thus given her the impression that she was right) -- but instead I went and talked to the station manager who confirmed that photography was allowed. No altercations, no arguments, no shouting -- we just resolved it and made one more "official" aware of the rule/law.
I am all for handling these situations amicably (although sometimes some people are just looking for a fight), but I strongly object to the idea that we should voluntarily cave in to paranoia.
I am all for handling these situations amicably (although sometimes some people are just looking for a fight), but I strongly object to the idea that we should voluntarily cave in to paranoia.
Agreed. Altough in the case of the OP, he was in the wrong for not doing what the owner of the property told him to do.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
). They roll down the window. I congratulate them, get their name and tell her I got everything on camera (and why). I hope the photos are decent and if she would give me her e-mail address, I will send them to her. She gave it to me.
