more trouble, photo at school leads to disciplinary meeting

[Lawrence Dawson]: Stony Brook is a public, i.e. State university, so the entirr campus is public.

 

There is a difference between public funding and public access. Military bases are funded by tax dollars as are many

airports. That doesn't mean that all areas are publicly accessible.

<p>There's no reason to assume that the OP won't present himself well at any disciplinary hearing and in doing so, show that perhaps others over-reacted and also maybe went beyond what was necessary. OTOH, if he gets a sympathetic faculty member to assist him in discussing his rights to retain his images, he might do just fine and also help educate the RAs as to their positions in this sort of affair.</p>

<p>I've read the first dozen or so replies to the OP, then skipped to the end. I take my camera EVERYWHERE I go. It's a Nikon D300. Sometimes I have a little Sigma 30/1.4 attached. Sometimes I have the Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VR with grip attached.</p>

<p>95% of the time I visit my local grocery store(s) I carry my camera into the store. Everyone here knows the store is a non-public location and the taking of pictures can be forbidden by store policy. Over the couple years I've had my D300 I've shot some interesting candids in the store. I printed up the best and one day gave them to the clerk manning my check-out lane. They ended up posting the pics on the in-house bulletin board.</p>

<p>Two months later, I'm walking in to the store with the camera and big lens. I see the big boss out on the sidewalk having a smoke. As I get to the door, I see him put out his cigarette and casually follow me in to the store from a distance. I start my shopping and a couple minutes later the big guy comes up to me and asks if he can do anything for me. I say, no thanks. He then asks about my camera with the bazooka lens mounted, like why do I have it with me? Do I know it's against store policy to allow cameras in the store, etc. I tell him I take people pics. I ask him if he's seen the pics of various staff members that were on the bulletin board for a while. He said yes. I said they were my pics. He basically said...oh ...OK...they were nice pics. I said I don't take product pics, only people pics. He said basically, OK, keep doing what you're doing, I don't have a problem with that.</p>

<p>The moral of my story is be up front. Be obvious. You can still get some really nice pics. Be honest if questioned. Be nice and calm. It's amazing the reaction you get when you're honest (in gestures and words).</p>

<p>Another time I went into Port Columbus International Airport. I was in black jeans, camo jacket, camo hat, winter beard (fairly well trimmed) and again, my D300 with 70-200 and grip. While strolling through the main concourse with my rig hanging from my hands for all to see, a group of Homeland Security folks stopped me. The leader asked how I liked my D300. He was thinking about purchasing one for his own use. I showed him some of the pics I shot earlier and how well the 70-200 f/2.8 worked in available light. We parted with the leader thanking me for showing him my camera and what it could produce.</p>

<p>I'm sure that if I'd been furtive in either of the above instances things would not have ended so happily for ALL concerned, not just me.</p>

<p>Act suspicious, then be prepared to be a suspect. Act open, aboveboard, and friendly and prepare to be pleasantly surprised.</p>

<p>I take my camera (with the bazooka mounted sometimes) into the local malls, stores, airport, jails, courthouses, restaurants, you name it. Never a problem. I have a smile on my face. I'm ready to talk to whomever wants to talk, in uniform or out.</p>

<p>Mark</p>

<blockquote>

<p>There's no reason to assume that the OP won't present himself well at any disciplinary hearing and in doing so, show that perhaps others over-reacted and also maybe went beyond what was necessary.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>We shouldn't 'assume' anything but the odds don't look good after he failed so miserably at gaining the support of a pro photography rights leaning crowd here . This is the second thread of recent vintage where that happened. If he succeeds, it will most likely be recognition that nothing technically was wrong if his antics arguments don't obscure that.</p>

<p>John, I couldn't agree more.</p>

<p>Here's an example of someone giving out advice and making judgments without bothering to pay attention to what was actually reported to have occured, and how Jeremy responded.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>"I am just positive that parents will be thrilled to think their kids are being stalked and photographed at night by someone who runs back to his dorm after taking the digital images. That the OP is oblivious to his inexcusable position as some martyr for photography is both scary and sad. There is simply zero justification to be out at night on campus taking surprise images of unknown fellow students".</p>

</blockquote>

<blockquote>

<p>"thats a great opinion you have there dennis, living in paranoia". - Jeremy</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Jeremy related that he was inside a common room of the dorm...taking pictures of people who were outside the building (including the girls). He wasn't outside, in the cold and dark...lurking around the corner of a building, waiting to pounce on his photographic prey. He was inside a common room of the dorm...taking pictures of those on the outside of the building. Jeremy responded to the errant accusations...but <strong>instead of taking opportunity to clarify the facts, all he does is make a smartassed remark. </strong>A perfect example of why Jeremy needs to have a parent and/or a good lawyer with him for the hearing. I have a feeling that simply sceaming, "I have rights...I have rights!" ...won't be an adequate defense for the young lad.</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>I could have just deleted the photos and said nothing but some things are worth something to me and worth fighting for.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Well, sort of. I mean they weren't worth that much... You did delete them, right?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>...and so i just deleted them in front of the RA guy.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Why did you delete them? You were willing to stand by your "rights" with the girls whose photo you took but when confronted with your RA you caved?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>If I knew I was doing something wrong or illegal I wouldn't do it, it is common sense.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Now see, that's an interesting statement because all indications are that you believe that if it's not illegal it can't be wrong.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>between me and the girla, we have forgot about each other.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That's a shame. You blew an opportunity to share your "art" with two college girls by running away. I'm sure they haven't forgotten you.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Fred that is not true and you are using my email out of context, please review the whole thread before you misinterpret it again.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Sadly, I've read this entire thread and Fred is not using your email out of context or misinterpreting. If anything, he has recognized that your email serves to lend context to some of the things you've written previously.</p>

<p>This comes down to an issue of confidence. If you had it, you would not have left your perch in that common area window for any reason other than to show them your photos and get at least <em>one</em> of their phone numbers. Didn't you state in a previous thread that you were looking for models? Instead, you went back to your room. It's not clear if you said <em>anything</em> to them prior to retreating.</p>

<p>So, I think you should either reevaluate your approach to "art" and what is right or wrong regardless of legallity or do as someone above has suggested... invest in a small-body camera and make lubrication an essential part of your street photography kit.</p>

<p>As a side note... I wonder if Stony Brook, being a public institution, is required to release or publish the transcripts of their disciplinary hearings?</p>

<p>Jeff, You brought up something I started to comment on, but I didn't want to "write a book"... <br>

Jeremy clearly stated he deleted the photos, but then comes back later and clearly states he did not. I don't think he even realized he had contradicted himself, and I don't believe he was trying to mislead us...he just doesn't take the time, or perhaps doesn't have the skills necessary to clearly communicate the facts. Whatever the case...he hurts his own cause almost every time he opens his mouth. </p>