[mattt]

I know the topic has been kicked around a fair bit. I liked the way this was presented and it covers most of the issues well.

LENS (NYT photo blog)

[DeadJohn]

The article is mostly about professional journalism, but even as a hobbyist in New York City I've had negative comments from police. I've rehearsed my strategy ... Explain how they're wrong, ask for a supervisor if needed, and don't back down even if it means arrest. My photos mean little but by affirming my rights I am helping to protect everyone's rights.

I had one cop claim that any photo showing a bridge was illegal, including every skyline shot of NYC and all the tourist shots of the Brooklyn Bridge.

[Medium FormatPro]

Good article for the most point, but...

Not quite accurate. It mentions the item where if someone is on the street with a 50mm lens - it's alright, but then states if it's an 800mm lens' then aimed through someone window - that it might result in some sort of legal action.

That would be incorrect.

It doesn't matter what size lens has on ones camera; If it's a camera available to the general public - regardless of cost - it's alright to use in public - even when aimed literally towards any window that doesn't have covering over it.

As long as one isn't posing a general safety risk by blocking items like sidewalks, doors, etc... If a person isn't quite bright enough to want to either; place items like window shades on their wondows - or be cautious as to what they fo in front of those windows, then... It's all public game

[grhazelton]

This has been posted before, but its worth a repost. Bert P. Krages Attorney at Law Photographer's Rights Page

Bert P. Krages is a lawyer and has developed a quick guide to photog's rights in pdf format. Worth printing off and keeping in your gadget bag or whatever when you're out and about in the US, which is rapidly becoming a national security state. The Founders would be ashamed of our cowardice in giving up our liberties for the chimera of security.

[jaywes]

Very interesting article. I can see this happening, especially in NYC. The few times I have witnessed incidents/crossed paths with the police, they have been misinformed or blatantly incorrect. I strongly agree with the statement that "to protect and serve" has been heavily misconstrued as "we are enforcers and can do as we please".

IMO the reference to the 50mm vs 800mm was correctly put. You can't tell me that if you sat on the public street with a 800mm lens and purposely aimed it at private residences that you wouldn't be questioned and possible detained. It kind of shows an intent on evading someone privacy.

*SNIP* I've rehearsed my strategy ... Explain how they're wrong, ask for a supervisor if needed, and don't back down even if it means arrest. My photos mean little but by affirming my rights I am helping to protect everyone's rights.

Unless I was in full fledged photog and my livelihood depended on my work, I would not take it as far as getting arrested as a hobbyist. IMHO the negatives far out weighs the positives. The ability to provide for my family and future restriction due to an arrest/charge while involved in a hobby is a no brainer.

I had one cop claim that any photo showing a bridge was illegal, including every skyline shot of NYC and all the tourist shots of the Brooklyn Bridge.

Reminds me of an incident I had while photographing my car. (I should have know I was going to be approached being that the police station was up the block, but I proceeded). I parked my car by a highway and small overpass. I wanted to test my long exposures with the moving cars in the background. One police car passed with out even stopping. The 2nd passed and popped a U-turn. I prepped for confrontation. It was quite possibly the best encounter though haha. The officers merely asked what I was doing and for ID. I told them, in general, and simply didn't give any reason for them to feel as though I was threatening. They stated it really didn't matter that I was photographing, but they had to stop b/c it was city infrastructure and to ensure I wasn't planning to blow up the highway (their exact word before laughing!). They apologized multiple times for disturbing me and "disrupting my artistic endeavors" haha. Then again this wasn't anywhere in NYC but Westchester.

[DeadJohn]

I consider my willingness (but not eagerness) to be arrested more of an act of charity than a sign of my devotion to photography. I'm powerless against many injustices that impact others, but maybe I can drag a case through the courts and have a small chance to contribute to an improvement that helps everyone.

[jaywes]

Though I strongly disagree, I applaud your willingness.

I'd choose to make change (for whatever cause it may be) from outside the jail cell rather than in it.

[glanglois]

This has been posted before, but its worth a repost. Bert P. Krages Attorney at Law Photographer's Rights Page

Bert P. Krages is a lawyer and has developed a quick guide to photog's rights in pdf format. Worth printing off and keeping in your gadget bag or whatever when you're out and about in the US, which is rapidly becoming a national security state. The Founders would be ashamed of our cowardice in giving up our liberties for the chimera of security.

Please note that Krages makes a note of the exception for expectation of privacy, specifically inside a private home. And I would argue that the lens used and its general availability have little or nothing to do with legal definition of invasion of privacy. It's the invasion that creates the problem, not the technical means to achieve it.

[grhazelton]

Please note that Krages makes a note of the exception for expectation of privacy, specifically inside a private home. And I would argue that the lens used and its general availability have little or nothing to do with legal definition of invasion of privacy. It's the invasion that creates the problem, not the technical means to achieve it.

Quite right. I've seen the example used that photographing someone reading on a park bench is one thing, shooting over his/her shoulder with any sort of lens to reveal a prescription label is something else indeed. That sort of shooting probably steps over the line, since anyone should be able to read such material in privacy.