Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Community Talk, Chatter & Stuff General Photography Talk 
Thread started 02 Dec 2011 (Friday) 17:54
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

You ever been told you can not take a photo?

 
FlyingPhotog
Cream of the "Prop"
Avatar
57,560 posts
Likes: 178
Joined May 2007
Location: Probably Chasing Aircraft
     
Dec 03, 2011 04:43 |  #16

Jason Paul wrote in post #13487292 (external link)
I went into a cool store a few months ago. They had some neat figurines, little statues, carvings, and other cool stuff from different countries. I started taking pictures here and there.

A lady came up to me and said "We actually don't allow photography". So, I just said, "OK Sorry :)" and put on the lens cap. No biggie.

However, before I even walked in the store I looked all over the door and front windows for a "No Photography" sign and didn't see one.

Not a problem, but if I had seen a sign I wouldn't have taken any in the first place.

Jason

It's a common courtesy thing to not photograph other people's artwork...

I shoot up in Sedona, AZ frequently but anytime I enter a gallery, the lens gets capped and the camera gets slung toward my back in an obviously not ready to shoot posture.


Jay
Crosswind Images (external link)
Facebook Fan Page (external link)

"If you aren't getting extraordinary images from today's dSLRs, regardless of brand, it's not the camera!" - Bill Fortney, Nikon Corp.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Miki ­ G
Goldmember
1,179 posts
Likes: 400
Joined Feb 2011
Location: Ireland
     
Dec 03, 2011 05:27 |  #17

It's just common courtesy to ask the malls centre management if it's ok to take a few photos. They are the people who instruct the security officers as to policy & mostly will allow it. Photographers often interfere with other customers in the mall who don't want to be photographed. I personally knocked over a guys camera & tripod which he left unattended at the bottom of an escalator (he was approx 20 meters away with remote release). One of the tripod legs were sticking out where people were stepping off the escalator.:rolleyes:




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RichSoansPhotos
Cream of the Crop
5,981 posts
Likes: 44
Joined Aug 2007
Location: London, UK
     
Dec 03, 2011 05:48 |  #18
bannedPermanent ban

Yes. Even with a p&s camera, it was at an airport which serves London, just about to take a photo of a docked plane, security guy comes rushing to me, pointing to a notice saying I couldn't take a photo there




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JeffreyG
"my bits and pieces are all hard"
Avatar
15,540 posts
Gallery: 42 photos
Likes: 620
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Detroit, MI
     
Dec 03, 2011 07:53 |  #19

imjason wrote in post #13488164 (external link)
i got approached by security. they told me its a security/terrorist thing.

This makes the guards feel more macho. Of course, most terrorists don't need photo surveillance (e.g. Timothy McVeigh and the 9-11 hikackers). And if they do need photo surveillance, there is always Google Maps.

And finally, a resourcefull terrorist should be able to wander around while pretending to chat on the phone while taking photos.

The only legitimate reasons for a photography ban really are commercial, the store tenants may have a legitimate reason to not want their displays photographed.


My personal stuff:http://www.flickr.com/​photos/jngirbach/sets/ (external link)
I use a Canon 5DIII and a Sony A7rIII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
20droger
Cream of the Crop
14,685 posts
Likes: 27
Joined Dec 2006
     
Dec 03, 2011 08:48 |  #20

JeffreyG wrote in post #13488461 (external link)
This makes the guards feel more macho. Of course, most terrorists don't need photo surveillance (e.g. Timothy McVeigh and the 9-11 hikackers). And if they do need photo surveillance, there is always Google Maps.

And finally, a resourcefull terrorist should be able to wander around while pretending to chat on the phone while taking photos.

The only legitimate reasons for a photography ban really are commercial, the store tenants may have a legitimate reason to not want their displays photographed.

Your arguments about terrorists and cameras has one major flaw. You're assuming that all terrorists are smart enough to do what you would do.

Terrorists are just ordinary people, which means that some of them are pretty damned stupid.

As for the security guards on a power trip, in some cases you are right. After all, security guards are ordinary people, too.

And remember, not only are some ordinary people pretty stupid, even the smartest of them have bad brain days.

What do you think happens when a stupid one has a bad brain day? Sometimes the idiots are just too stupid to drool. A perfect day to drag out the DSLR to take shots of high-security installations.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JeffreyG
"my bits and pieces are all hard"
Avatar
15,540 posts
Gallery: 42 photos
Likes: 620
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Detroit, MI
     
Dec 03, 2011 08:58 |  #21

20droger wrote in post #13488577 (external link)
Your arguments about terrorists and cameras has one major flaw. You're assuming that all terrorists are smart enough to do what you would do.

Terrorists are just ordinary people, which means that some of them are pretty damned stupid.

The stupid ones are the ones that are caught before they are successful. Probably they are spotted wandering around with a huge dSLR before heading back to the bomb lab.

As for the security guards on a power trip, in some cases you are right. After all, security guards are ordinary people, too.

I just think the guards don't want to tell you to put the camera away because Old Navy doesn't want any competitors recording their Christmas display.

But I hate all kinds of petty restrictions being blamed on 'terrorists' as if it makes sense. Banning cameras at the mall has absolutely nothing to do with worries about terrorists. It would be silly if it wasn't insidious.

If I want to check the probable radius of destruction from a bomb blast, I'll just hit Google Maps. Seriously. Does anyone think Timothy McVeigh needed actual photographs of the building, or did he just take a look and think "I guess I'll park the truck right out front there, right by the daycare center."


My personal stuff:http://www.flickr.com/​photos/jngirbach/sets/ (external link)
I use a Canon 5DIII and a Sony A7rIII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tzalman
Fatal attraction.
Avatar
13,497 posts
Likes: 213
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Gesher Haziv, Israel
     
Dec 03, 2011 09:26 |  #22

Hey, all that stuff you see on TV about spy cameras disguised as a button or a tie pin, forget it. No self respecting terrorist would even use a cropper. Minimum FF, more likely a MFDB.


Elie / אלי

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sandpiper
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,171 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 53
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Merseyside, England
     
Dec 03, 2011 10:13 as a reply to  @ tzalman's post |  #23

Unfortunately, a portion of the general public is pretty ignorant about the whole photography as a hobby thing. They understand taking family snapshots, but anybody shooting other stuff is "probably up to no good".

Try taking your DSLR into any public space, and particularly somewhere with children in it, and you can see people looking at you suspiciously. The media has whipped up a hysteria about paedophiles and that hasn't been helped by schools etc., (in many places) stopping people photographing school plays / concerts / sports days etc. because of the risk of people photographing kids that are not their own (and potentially misusing those images - in some cases even stating the risk of paedophiles). It is of course pretty ridiculous to US as photographers, but many parents see a DSLR in the vicinity of their little precious and assume the worst.

I have had police called out to "deal with a pervert taking pictures in the park" by parents who were uncomfortable at seeing a camera. This happens at local parks, on the beach etc. I have even had parents come over to me and tell me to "F... off and not bother their children", despite the fact that I was pointing the camera in the opposite direction at the shorebirds feeding on the tideline. Now, I am always very careful not to point it in the direction of children and am there shooting birdlife, squirrels, scenery etc. The police have always been very polite, and apologetic about disturbing me, but they have to check out any reports. I quite understand that and do not blame them at all, it is the parents suffering from media hyped paranoia that are the problem.

Even without the P word, many people just don't like being photographed and, again, are uncomfortable when a guy with a DSLR is taking (to them) random shots. Candid street photographers haven't helped this issue, and their is a TV inspired mental link between big lenses and cops, private investigators and snoopers (particularly worrying to some people for various reasons, if they feel they have something to hide)

As malls etc., are keen to have people find their visits enjoyable, I can understand why they don't want hordes of people with DSLRs wandering around the place making customers feel uncomfortable. Again, the problem is more with the public perception of SLR users than with the mall owners, who are simply trying to keep the shoppers happy.

It's a sad state of affairs, but most of these restrictions are due (at least in part) to many people being uneasy around SLR users. This doesn't get helped by the brigade who do take pictures of the public and stand on their rights to do so, even when they know the person is uncomfortable. I'm not arguing against their viewpoint, just making a comment about the effect it can have.

Heck, even as a photographer, I can feel uncomfortable when I see a camera pointed at me by a stranger, so I can understand it in non photographers.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mike ­ Deep
Goldmember
Avatar
1,915 posts
Gallery: 95 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 965
Joined Apr 2008
Location: Upstate NY
     
Dec 03, 2011 14:36 |  #24

20droger wrote in post #13488577 (external link)
Your arguments about terrorists and cameras has one major flaw. You're assuming that all terrorists are smart enough to do what you would do.

Terrorists are just ordinary people, which means that some of them are pretty damned stupid.

As for the security guards on a power trip, in some cases you are right. After all, security guards are ordinary people, too.

And remember, not only are some ordinary people pretty stupid, even the smartest of them have bad brain days.

What do you think happens when a stupid one has a bad brain day? Sometimes the idiots are just too stupid to drool. A perfect day to drag out the DSLR to take shots of high-security installations.

So in summary,
a) terrorists don't need photo recon, however,
b) if they did, it would make sense for them to be discreet, but
c) because they're probably stupid, they'll use a 5D2 everywhere, presumably while wearing a turban and shouting "Death to America!"
d) Therefore, ban all the DSLRs


mikedeep.com (external link) - rocket launch photography

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dave ­ kadolph
"Fix the cigarette lighter"
Avatar
6,140 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Joined Mar 2007
Location: West Michigan--166.33 miles to the Cook County courthouse
     
Dec 03, 2011 15:22 |  #25

JeffreyG wrote in post #13488461 (external link)
This makes the guards feel more macho. Of course, most terrorists don't need photo surveillance (e.g. Timothy McVeigh and the 9-11 hikackers). And if they do need photo surveillance, there is always Google Maps.

And finally, a resourcefull terrorist should be able to wander around while pretending to chat on the phone while taking photos.

The only legitimate reasons for a photography ban really are commercial, the store tenants may have a legitimate reason to not want their displays photographed.

QFT--My son in law is working on the next generation supercarrier.

Bing maps keeps me abreast of the latest progress--the resolution is fabulous for those of us in the general population--down to being able to read numbers on individual equipment on the flight deck from a satellite view.

Sort of makes you wonder what the classified photos look like--and why the resolution of our state of the art gear is so low. ;)


Middle age is when you can finally afford the things that a young man could truly enjoy.
Tools of the trade

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
imjason
Goldmember
1,667 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Bay Area, CA
     
Dec 03, 2011 16:04 as a reply to  @ Mike Deep's post |  #26

from my experience, its usually private security companies complaining. ive been asked, on more than one occasion, not use my tripod (handheld was fine) even when theres no one around so its not a safety hazard. of course once i asked, the security guard explained to me its a terrorist security policy. from what i've read from places such as nat geo, its usually a commercial issue. of course some of the nat geo photographers got around that too by doing things such as getting a friend to distract security. haha.

US government doesnt care that much IMO, unless you're in a high security area. I live in San Francisco, theres plenty of government landmarks and buildings here. Most of them allow photos. It will be a sad day when we cannot photograph the golden gate bridge in fear of it blowing up.


Canon gear: EOS M, Canonet QL17, SX230HS, S95, SD1200IS
Non-Canon gear: D600, D5000, D70, XG-2, U20
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pixiepearls
I do bad things in the dark
Avatar
3,061 posts
Joined Feb 2011
     
Dec 03, 2011 19:30 |  #27

how funny, I've never had it happen yet :)


Brandy 500px (external link)
I ♥ my 5D TF'd March '11
DARKROOM CHEMIST BLOG (external link) - My Dad's Pix (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FlyingPhotog
Cream of the "Prop"
Avatar
57,560 posts
Likes: 178
Joined May 2007
Location: Probably Chasing Aircraft
     
Dec 03, 2011 21:57 |  #28

pixiepearls wrote in post #13490675 (external link)
how funny, I've never had it happen yet :)

Of course you haven't...

To put it bluntly, you have boobs.

It's decidedly a testosterone on testosterone thing.


Jay
Crosswind Images (external link)
Facebook Fan Page (external link)

"If you aren't getting extraordinary images from today's dSLRs, regardless of brand, it's not the camera!" - Bill Fortney, Nikon Corp.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
boerewors
Goldmember
Avatar
1,948 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Sep 2009
Location: South African living in Indonesia
     
Dec 03, 2011 22:42 |  #29

does this only happen in the malls? Where i am i get told to shove off absolutely everywhere i go unless i pay a premium price to use the area. I once asked permission to photograph in a park and the answer was yes, but no tripods or light stands. So i got my wife to be the light stand and hold the umbrella. Later the security guard came to us and said he cant allow us to continue. He just recalled that flash is not allowed unless paying a premium. Ok fair enough then... I put away the umbrella and took out the reflector.. After this i was escourted out of the premisis on the grounds that i was purposly trying to anger the park management. This happened when i was trying to shoot an engagement. Made me look really bad and i now make my prices according to the locations i shoot at. But here in indonesia i beleive the money paid to use 95% of locations gets pocketed by the security guards.


The most important piece of gear you own, resides in your head and its called your brain.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
20droger
Cream of the Crop
14,685 posts
Likes: 27
Joined Dec 2006
     
Dec 03, 2011 23:24 |  #30

boerewors wrote in post #13491335 (external link)
does this only happen in the malls? Where i am i get told to shove off absolutely everywhere i go unless i pay a premium price to use the area. I once asked permission to photograph in a park and the answer was yes, but no tripods or light stands. So i got my wife to be the light stand and hold the umbrella. Later the security guard came to us and said he cant allow us to continue. He just recalled that flash is not allowed unless paying a premium. Ok fair enough then... I put away the umbrella and took out the reflector.. After this i was escourted out of the premisis on the grounds that i was purposly trying to anger the park management. This happened when i was trying to shoot an engagement. Made me look really bad and i now make my prices according to the locations i shoot at. But here in indonesia i beleive the money paid to use 95% of locations gets pocketed by the security guards.

It's the face. It puts them off.

That is. judging by the avatar.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

5,669 views & 0 likes for this thread, 30 members have posted to it.
You ever been told you can not take a photo?
FORUMS Community Talk, Chatter & Stuff General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is johntmyers418
1124 guests, 187 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.