Your rights as photographer is going bye bye

[jack_forester]

I was recently in Waldon Pond Mass. A photographer by name of Timothy Wolcott, who I have seen his

shows or exhibits and even collected a good amount of his work was there. I had emailed him to see

where he was going in the fall to see if I could get some pointers and watch him, because I know he

travels to shoot the fall every year.

 

He was shooting down along wymans meadow when a park ranger, ask him if he was a pro. He said

why do want to know. He said, we have a special fee for pros vs amatuers. He said it was not posted at

the entrance and he had paid his fee like any other person to come in.

 

The park ranger said the actions of a few caused us to add a fee to shooting and you have to register

up the front office. He quickly replied that by law it must be posted at the front, and he was not leaving

since he had been thier since 530am, by the way its 9:30 now and the lighting was getting really good.

 

The park ranger and him got in a somewhat heated debate, but Tim just kept shooting while they were

talking since the lighting was exactly what he said he was waiting for 4 hours.

 

He asked why now the fees, because the ranger, said that all park are looking to curb, possible damage

from photographers since the Fatali incident and a few others. Tim quickly pointed out that he was not

Fatali and that isn't right. Tim went on to tell him to take a look at his website and you will see that he

shoots for TNC and state and Fed parks and he has done more for the enviroment than he will ever do.

 

The park ranger knew that he was right and left, but I would imagine they will post it, for the next

person. But arrive early since they are not open till 9.00am. You wil still have to pay your normal fee

like everyone else, but by the time they open the lighting is almost over.

 

If you get the chance you, should look at his work, his prints are exceptional. Look at

galleryoftheamericanlandscape.com

 

Sometimes if you ask the right way, these guys will let you watch them work and you can learn from

master photographers, long as if you don't ask stupid questions, its better than any workshop.

Workshops are good for learning tech stuff and quick remedies to softwares and insider stuff. But its

knoweledge of learning to see that makes the great photographers great.

 

remember you still have to know when to shoot and what you are doing, I know he learned from some

of the greats like Adams, phillips, weber. I'm going to try to see if this year he is going to alaska in the

fall, you can really learn alot, and the one thing he said to me is Don't get caught up in all the digital

hoohah. Its okay to be digital but learn previsualize, visualize and post visualize your shot.

 

I think the thing to remember is stand up for your rights, if you let them they will not let us do

anything. Jack

[kiro]

In Ohio, this is the way it's been as long as I've known how to use a camera (about 15 years).

It's always mystified me how a public park, paid for by tax dollars, has such restrictions. By

the same logic, why don't cops ask photogs for permits on city sidewalks? The money comes

from the same pot.

[savagesax]

I was kicked out of a area at Zion. There was a 6 foot fence, in length, then ended. I figured it was for people to not drive on this area of grass if they were turning around their car on this dirt road. The Ranger said they just stated building the fence and it would be about 2 miles long and no one can cross the fence area the whole length of the road. Well I asked why they did put up a post saying so.

 

9 months later I returned, the fence is still the same length and no signs that photographers can't cross this area. Jerks! How can we keep up with these silly rules if they don't post them?

[joseph_smith3]

Hi Jack, Something similar happened to me in Houston last year at a festival open to the public with ticket sales. Because I looked like a professionsl (I had a back pack and a monopod) I was told I could not photograph at the festival. I was polite and told the gentleman that nothing was posted, nothing was printed on my ticket, etc. He threatened to have me arrested. I asked him why he was not stopping all of the fathers with their video cameras who were also going to be taking pictures. He said they were not professional. I said, how did he know that? And what does professional have to do with it?

 

I suggest you look at a link posted at another site, Naturescapes:

http://www.naturescapes.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=67465&highlight=photographers+rights

 

If the link does not work (you have to be a member) , check out the web site of Carolyn Wright.

 

 

Carolyn E. Wright, Esq.

www.photoattorney.com

Author of the new "Photographer's Legal Guide"

 

Joe Smith

[pico]

That's a good example of the worst kind of thinking. Politicians believe everything they do

must have a sponsor/lobbyiest so they can make bucks, and believe professional

photographers are of the same mindset.

 

It just sucks.

 

The Ranger was just doing his job and arguing with him won't help one bit. He's frustrated

and so are we.

[Two23]

So, you guys are whining about THIS? LOL! I love to take photos of trains. Have any idea of what I've been through? Two years ago I was on a public road and was threatened by a security guard for taking photos of a bridge. He started yelling at me, "I have an automatic rifle!" This is in IOWA, for crying out loud. I called the sherrif. In Omaha I was taking photos of a rare slot train along the side of a public road when TWO dark blue surburbans pulled up and Miltary Police with M16A's walked up to me. At least they were professional and polite. Another time I was on a public sidewalk taking photos of a UP derailment, and a railroad cop attempted to yank my camera away. I pointed to my teenage son sitting about 150 yards away in my pickup truck, and told the RR cop my kid had orders to load my deer rifle and SHOOT anyone who appeared to be robbing or attacking me. He left me alone. In the Northeast there's a Kimberly Clark diaper plant that has a couple of old switch engines. If you try taking photos of them from the public road or sidewalk, they call the city police who come and actually arrest you.

 

Want more? Last summer I was in Chicago taking photos of the "L" train, like any other tourist. An MTA official came up and started questioning me, asked for ID. I complied, but while she was checking me out, a Middle Eastern guy in early 20s walked right past us and boarded the train carrying a huge canvas suitcase. I'm more suspicious than THAT? What the hell is going on here???? A friend of mine was taking photos of the Metra train from a public street/overpass in downtown Chicago and was approached by police and told he couldn't do that any more. Asked for his ID. In Twin Cities I had permission to be on private property to take photos of a BNSF hump yard. RR police came up and began hassling me, saying they would take me to jail if I didn't leave. Fortunately I had the phone number for divisional manager and was able to get ahold of him on my cell phone. At another location in MN there was a major BNSF derailment, near my home. I got written permission from the land owner along the RoW to be on his property, taking photos of the clean up. A white SUV came roaring up and out jumped a big guy from the railroad's divisional office. Tried to shove me down and yank my camera away. I whipped out my cell phone and called the deputy, told the guy I was going to have him arrested for assault and battery PLUS have my brother the attorney sue the HELL out of him, showed him my written permission. He apologized and left.

 

Want more? New Jersey Transit requires you have a permit to take ANY photos of ANY of their trains. There are some bridges in the Northeast it is illegal to photo, from anywhere. Has any one read the latest Shutterbug, about the guy taking photos of NY City bridges but no longer can do that?

 

So, you think you get hassled in national parks? At least they don't point automatic rifles at you. And, you can easily wear camoflauge to avoid them.

 

 

Kent in SD

[yann1]

I used to complain about taking photos in Taiwan, but finally...when I read all this I really wonder in what kind of country you're living... I think it's easier to carry a gun in America than a camera.

[Mary Doo]

Kent, it seems mass transit vehicles and structures such as bridges and tunnels are very much subject to tight security procedures since 911. I tried to photograph the Brooklyn Bridge last year at Brooklyn Bridge Park and was told that I must have a permit to do so. So I walked a few blocks away and found a much better vantage point! -- Kicked out and lucked out! ;-)

 

Mary

[ronaldo_r]

"...Middle Eastern guy in early 20s... carrying a huge canvas suitcase..."

 

Scary s#$t indeed

[craig_gillette]

So, what kind of added outrage would one need to go from a complaint on a forum to actually filing a criminal or civil action?

[joseph_smith3]

Kent, you are right. It is almost impossible post 9/11 to take a photo in downtown Houston anymore let alone along the ship channelor at NASA. My photo club was stopped from taking photos of any utility worker, policeman, construction worker, etc. Reason--homeland security does not allow any photos of anything related to public works or public safety. We have been told that building owners have the right to prevent people from taking pictures of them if there is a chance of an image of it being used without their permission. Not sure if any of this is true or legal, but I do not want to be the test case. Joe Smith

[jay ott]

Does anyone see the irony of Jack's story? If not, then you should read Thoreau's <a href="http://thoreau.eserver.org/civil1.html">treatise.</a><p>

[photomark]

Just think: had over-zealous park rangers been in abundance in the mid-1800s our friend

Henry David probably would have been thrown out on his a**, <i>Walden</i> would have

been named for some other place and this pond would now be surrounded by private

property and development.

[the lone ranger]

I had a similar issue last month. The way I look at it. If they will do something as stupid as have a photographer arrested in public places, then the resulting publicity from that just makes it sound even more absurd. Rulesfor "pro" photography soundslike jealousy to me. It's reeks of a "My job sucks, so yours should too." attitude. After special permit costs, a pro would be making as much profit as an amateur. Makes no sense whatsoever especially if they are shooting in the same manner. I woudln't be surprised if some of those same people making up these so called rules are actually selfish photographers who feel like they are in competition by having others around. Write rules to compensate for a lack of originality, or sometimes talent for that matter.

<p>

<a href="http://www.rwongphoto.com">Two-Lane Road Photography by Richard Wong</a><br>

<a href="http://www.rwongphoto.com/fieldreport">In the Field: Photography Blog</a>

[pvp]

The best part is, if terrorists want to take photos, they will be using cellphone cameras or tiny digitals that pass unnoticed. But let a serious photographer show up with a tripod and a real camera and suddenly there's a problem. In fact, most of the changes in public safety rules since 9/11 have done nothing to make any of us safer, and are in fact just putting on a show for the more gullible members of the electorate. But as long as the politicians can generate a little press coverage about how they're dutifully protecting us (regardless of effectiveness,) the public will believe it's worth it.

[steve_levine]

How about the brilliant , but un-enforceable plan to ban shooting in the NYC subways? Most of this is a "we are doing something, so we can say we are doing something" posture. Even if it is all pointless, and will do nothing to make anyone safer?

[robert x]

"The Ranger was just doing his job and arguing with him won't help one bit."

 

But this time it did help !

[pico]

Kent, and others - I swear you must have the very worst luck. I never, ever have problems

with folks when I make photos. A typical case - I was on the RR tracks recently near a RR

bridge, doing pictures with another fellow (being quite deaf, it helps to have someone

watching for traffic behind me), tripod, big camera and the only "encounter" I had was typical:

a RR worker approaches and we have a good chat. It always goes like that.

[johnclinch]

WOW looks for once the UK is ahead in freedom.

 

There are very few legal restrictions on photographers in the uk (there are some on private property)

 

One of the few it is illegal to photogragh paper money. Something Americans seem to do alot.

 

Are national Parks are rather different but permits for anything except cars, guns and light aircraft are inconceivable.

[thomas_sullivan]

I don't shoot much Nature anymore, but I am well versed in the legalities of shooting in public places in cities. First, since January 2006, New Jersey does NOT restrict photography of transit vehicles or property.....<a href="http://www.nycsubway.org/faq/photopermits.html"><u>Photography on Transit Systems</u></a>. Also, a photo net member, and lawyer, has a website that explains a lot regarding this matter...most of it is city related, but, I would imagine that it is at least a beginning for public lands of the nature variety...it is after all PUBLIC Property, and regardles of where that public property is, I would hope the rules remain constant. <a href="http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm"><u>Bert Krages Photographers Rights</u></a><br><br>The problem is that a lot of the security guards, which I guess would include Park Rangers, and other authorities dont know the rules any more than some photographers do. If you frequent the Street Photography Forum on photo net you will find an abundance of information regarding your rights as photographers. I feel we should stick together on this front, not fight amongst ourselves, and make it clear to the general public that we have the right to photograph whatever we choose on public property.

[pico]

<i>a Middle Eastern guy in early 20s walked right past us and boarded the train carrying a huge canvas suitcase. I'm more suspicious than THAT?</i><p>

I find that notion quite disturbing. It seems that many of us have been convinced that all persons who look like Middle Easterners are immediately suspect. Perhaps you should reflect some more on your experience so that you might know how they feel.

[michelle_cox]

Pico - Glad to see I'm not the only one that picked up on that. I was debating whether to post because I don't want to derail the thread, but I do think that comment was unnecessary. The thought that someone is suspicious simply for being middle eastern and carrying a suitcase is just as worrying as being suspicious for carrying a camera.

 

Back on topic, threads like this are pretty scary. I hate to see how 9-11 is being used as an excuse for pointless "security". I haven't heard anything like this happening here in the La Crosse area, and I'm glad because we have a lot of photogenic bridges. :)

 

Michelle

[jack_forester]

I glad I got a rise out of you. Remember you must fight for your rights. I called Timothy

Wolcott last night and told him that I used his name for article. He said good, he likes to

prove his case and after he said that if it was not for photographers of the past and

present, the park would not have the money from tourism that they have. He said he now

carries his extended bio with him at parks. Because he donates his images to rational

enviromental causes and the parks of america. He said this will help some. He also

eludued to the fact the gov both state and fed cannot inturpret the law at all. It must be

word for word. So guys ask them to show you the law. It also must be printed on legal

paper. So have fun and keep the fight. If you don't they will take it away. Remember

asking for forgivness is easier than asking for permission, plus you got the shot. A quote

from Tim. Have fun Jack

[Ed_Ingold]

This alarmist stuff appears every so often. A visit to the park's website or a call to the administration would clear up any issues or misunderstandings. But this is a lot more fun, right?

 

Special usage fees and permits are generally required in national and state parks only when groups are involved, including instruction (e.g., in photography) for a fee, guided tours, use of models and weddings. If the OP was with a "professional photographer", the ranger could reasonably interpret that as "instruction".

 

Equipment, such as lights and reflectors, or anything involving a crew would require a permit. A tripod is permitted unless it interferes with or presents an hazard to other park users. You are permited to take pictures wherever the public in general is allowed as long as it does not interfere with other users, but need permits and probably supervision in non-public areas.

 

It makes sense to be non-confrontational unless there is no alternative. Then be prepared to win.

[bobatkins]

Edward is right. This isssue has come up from time to time with overzealous Park Rangers in national parks and in fact the head of the National Park system once issued a letter stating that an individual photographer could do anything which an ordinary member of the public could do wrt photography, professional or not.

 

Usually rules about "professional photography" are meant to apply to tour groups (workshops) and film crews who disrupt normal park operation or access. They are not meant to be applied to individual "pro" photographers who are are simply taking pictures just like anyone else. The rules about tour groups apply because if you carry out commercial activities in a park you also need insurance etc.

 

There have been a number of incidents where "pro" photographers have violated park rules (rules which apply to everyone) in order to "get the shot". This gives everyone a bad name and is the reason why some Park Rangers seem to be overzealous in enforcing their own interpretation of the rules. Holding a camera doesn't give you any more rights then anyone else, and some photographers need to learn that lesson or we will all suffer for their actions.

 

BTW please keep discussion here related to nature photography. The homeland security/terrorism stuff isn't really about nature photography and should be discussed in other appropriate forums.