You need a permit?

MRRiley · 12-04-2009, 11:51 AM

Originally posted by jimH

Here is some interesting reading concerning the photographing of Federal property.

Photographers’ Rights thinklia.com

I do believe that my response to that paranoid and moronic security guard would have been "then arrest me" as I snapped his photo to prove his identity...

We've had this discussion many many times and there is no law that can prevent you from taking photos of routine public buildings and facilities from a public place (or even private property where you have the right to be). Military and nuclear facilities are, in certain circumstances, exceptions to this principle.

Mike

Wheatfield · 12-04-2009, 04:16 PM

Originally posted by jboyde

Wow, real professional attitude there! She had no idea you had the permit until after you tried to shoo her out? Then waved the permit in her face? Nice.

I thought we were more mature than this.

I guess you had to be there.
You weren't.
Get back to me when you know what you are talking about.

**monochrome** · 12-04-2009, 06:11 PM

Originally posted by jboyde

Wow, real professional attitude there! She had no idea you had the permit until after you tried to shoo her out? Then waved the permit in her face? Nice.

I thought we were more mature than this.

Originally posted by Wheatfield

I guess you had to be there.
You weren't.
Get back to me when you know what you are talking about.

Uh, jboyde, if you read Wheatfield's entire post you might see the problem wasn't so much that she was in his reserved spot as that she didn't immediately admit that she was in his reserved spot, and move on of her own accord.

I had a similar situation at a campsite that I had reserved and paid for 3 months in advance- but my (prime) space was occupied by another group. They had already consumed considerable beer.

After half an hour of "polite" discussion (I don't give a F#$% if you have a reservation or not, I was here first), a Ranger drove by and very quickly cleared things up in my favor.

For about an hour.

The drunken asshats came back after dark and destroyed my campsite - but a neighboring family went off to get the Rangers, who arrested the entire group for public intoxication.

I'd bet that to this day those idiots don't think Park Rangers have Police powers - they sure said so loudly enough that evening.

So again, the permit holder is never at fault - the interloper is at fault - for not getting a permit and then for being a jerk about it.

Ratmagiclady · 12-04-2009, 06:34 PM

Originally posted by jimH

And it's just going to get worse with more "Big Government" in our lives. Your freedom isn't long for this world.

Try Bush's 'Patriot act,' more like.

If you want to make an actual correlation with legislation, try pointing a serious camera around a mall, or any city block declared to be one.

Obviously some young guard overstepped.

Steve Beswick · 12-05-2009, 03:52 AM

It would seen that the permit is free, but the insurance requirements will burn a hole in your pocket and through the center of the earth.

Guide to Filming on State Property - California Film Commission

Wildnsyko · 12-05-2009, 09:02 AM

In lieu of moving to NC in a few months and already making family plans to visit various mountains and state parks, I looked up their rules for photography:

"15A NCAC 12B .1102 COMMERCIAL PHOTOGRAPHY
A person shall not take photographs or moving pictures within any park for commercial purposes unless he has a permit."

res3567 · 12-06-2009, 08:58 AM

Originally posted by Wheatfield

There's a couple of places here where permits, while not required, are encouraged, and pulling one supposedly gives exclusive access to the area. It doen't necessarily mean squat though.
I "rented" a chunk of a local park one day for a wedding. When I got there I had to sweep the area, and then I had to chase another wedding out.
That part was kind of funny. I told the other photographer to pack up and go away, and was immediately challenged with the "what right do you have, you don't own the place, it's a public park" idiocy.
So, brandishing my permit in her face, I informed her that she was, in fact, trespassing, and that for the next two hours I did own the place.
So, she took her wedding party away from where I was shooting.
The cow did her level best to make certain she was setting her shots up to iterfere with the backgrounds in my shots. My assistant noticed that she was watching where I was setting up, and then setting her people up to be in line with my camera.
Once we had that strategy figured out, we made sure to "set up" a few unused people in our group in such a way to guarantee her an ugly background and then when she had her back turned, to set up the real shot with her fat ass out of the way.
It was quite funny, as my entire wedding party thought it was a wonderful lark, and family members who had other places to be hung around to act as decoys.
I got a great wedding and had fun, and I know that her customers would have gotten just about the worst possible.

Sounds like you had a blast Wheatfield......LOL!!!!!

Blue · 12-06-2009, 05:33 PM

Originally posted by Venturi

I don't think it is uncommon for municipalities to require permits for commercial photography on city property. They are required here too for commercial work done at the city parks. You can buy a single day permit for $25 or an annual one for $250. The annual one includes allowing you to reserve a location once per month and make use of indoor changing facilities where they exist.

Frankly, I don't have a problem with it at all either. The money collected is used for parks maintenance for one. And it provides a good tool for helping to keep things civil between parties, especially at a couple parks here that attract a huge number of shooters.

That's a weak argument. That's what various other taxes and fees are for. This is just a grab-ass government rule put in place under the auspices of the "Film Commission." Its questionable if they can legally enforce a bogus law that is in violation of other laws. We wonder why Cali is bankrupt. Its crap like this that makes me glad I left SoCal.

Blue · 12-06-2009, 05:35 PM

Originally posted by Ratmagiclady

Try Bush's 'Patriot act,' more like.

If you want to make an actual correlation with legislation, try pointing a serious camera around a mall, or any city block declared to be one.

Obviously some young guard overstepped.

Actually, it was "Ranger Rick" and not a young guard. Sure the unPatriot Act is full of shit due to the wording. However, there were plenty of the Senate and House the supported the crappy written thing. There is probably a bazaar czar in charge of photography.

jogiba · 12-06-2009, 06:51 PM

Right-wing authoritarianism

Blue · 12-06-2009, 07:08 PM

Originally posted by jogiba

Right-wing authoritarianism

I suggest you look at the California General Assembly as well as its U.S. Senators and many of its Reps and thin re-think that.

12-06-2009, 05:33 PM	#23
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by Venturi I don't think it is uncommon for municipalities to require permits for commercial photography on city property. They are required here too for commercial work done at the city parks. You can buy a single day permit for $25 or an annual one for $250. The annual one includes allowing you to reserve a location once per month and make use of indoor changing facilities where they exist. Frankly, I don't have a problem with it at all either. The money collected is used for parks maintenance for one. And it provides a good tool for helping to keep things civil between parties, especially at a couple parks here that attract a huge number of shooters. That's a weak argument. That's what various other taxes and fees are for. This is just a grab-ass government rule put in place under the auspices of the "Film Commission." Its questionable if they can legally enforce a bogus law that is in violation of other laws. We wonder why Cali is bankrupt. Its crap like this that makes me glad I left SoCal. Last edited by Blue; 12-06-2009 at 05:38 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Photography Business and the public space...need permit?	D4rknezz	Photographic Industry and Professionals	11	06-15-2010 01:07 PM
Permit Aperture Ring	drjaxon	Pentax DSLR Discussion	5	02-03-2009 08:37 PM

12-04-2009, 11:51 AM	#16
MRRiley Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Sterling, VA, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,275	Originally posted by jimH Here is some interesting reading concerning the photographing of Federal property. Photographers’ Rights thinklia.com I do believe that my response to that paranoid and moronic security guard would have been "then arrest me" as I snapped his photo to prove his identity... We've had this discussion many many times and there is no law that can prevent you from taking photos of routine public buildings and facilities from a public place (or even private property where you have the right to be). Military and nuclear facilities are, in certain circumstances, exceptions to this principle. Mike

12-04-2009, 04:16 PM	#17
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,976	Originally posted by jboyde Wow, real professional attitude there! She had no idea you had the permit until after you tried to shoo her out? Then waved the permit in her face? Nice. I thought we were more mature than this. I guess you had to be there. You weren't. Get back to me when you know what you are talking about.

12-04-2009, 06:11 PM	#18
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Originally posted by jboyde Wow, real professional attitude there! She had no idea you had the permit until after you tried to shoo her out? Then waved the permit in her face? Nice. I thought we were more mature than this. Originally posted by Wheatfield I guess you had to be there. You weren't. Get back to me when you know what you are talking about. Uh, jboyde, if you read Wheatfield's entire post you might see the problem wasn't so much that she was in his reserved spot as that she didn't immediately admit that she was in his reserved spot, and move on of her own accord. I had a similar situation at a campsite that I had reserved and paid for 3 months in advance- but my (prime) space was occupied by another group. They had already consumed considerable beer. After half an hour of "polite" discussion (I don't give a F#$% if you have a reservation or not, I was here first), a Ranger drove by and very quickly cleared things up in my favor. For about an hour. The drunken asshats came back after dark and destroyed my campsite - but a neighboring family went off to get the Rangers, who arrested the entire group for public intoxication. I'd bet that to this day those idiots don't think Park Rangers have Police powers - they sure said so loudly enough that evening. So again, the permit holder is never at fault - the interloper is at fault - for not getting a permit and then for being a jerk about it.

12-04-2009, 06:34 PM	#19
Ratmagiclady Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: GA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,563	Originally posted by jimH And it's just going to get worse with more "Big Government" in our lives. Your freedom isn't long for this world. Try Bush's 'Patriot act,' more like. If you want to make an actual correlation with legislation, try pointing a serious camera around a mall, or any city block declared to be one. Obviously some young guard overstepped.

12-05-2009, 03:52 AM	#20
Steve Beswick Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Ontario, California Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,736	It would seen that the permit is free, but the insurance requirements will burn a hole in your pocket and through the center of the earth. Guide to Filming on State Property - California Film Commission

12-05-2009, 09:02 AM	#21
Wildnsyko Inactive Account Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Southeast MO Photos: Gallery Posts: 366	In lieu of moving to NC in a few months and already making family plans to visit various mountains and state parks, I looked up their rules for photography: "15A NCAC 12B .1102 COMMERCIAL PHOTOGRAPHY A person shall not take photographs or moving pictures within any park for commercial purposes unless he has a permit."

12-06-2009, 08:58 AM	#22
res3567 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Houston Tx. Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,876	Originally posted by Wheatfield There's a couple of places here where permits, while not required, are encouraged, and pulling one supposedly gives exclusive access to the area. It doen't necessarily mean squat though. I "rented" a chunk of a local park one day for a wedding. When I got there I had to sweep the area, and then I had to chase another wedding out. That part was kind of funny. I told the other photographer to pack up and go away, and was immediately challenged with the "what right do you have, you don't own the place, it's a public park" idiocy. So, brandishing my permit in her face, I informed her that she was, in fact, trespassing, and that for the next two hours I did own the place. So, she took her wedding party away from where I was shooting. The cow did her level best to make certain she was setting her shots up to iterfere with the backgrounds in my shots. My assistant noticed that she was watching where I was setting up, and then setting her people up to be in line with my camera. Once we had that strategy figured out, we made sure to "set up" a few unused people in our group in such a way to guarantee her an ugly background and then when she had her back turned, to set up the real shot with her fat ass out of the way. It was quite funny, as my entire wedding party thought it was a wonderful lark, and family members who had other places to be hung around to act as decoys. I got a great wedding and had fun, and I know that her customers would have gotten just about the worst possible. Sounds like you had a blast Wheatfield......LOL!!!!!

12-06-2009, 05:35 PM	#24
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by Ratmagiclady Try Bush's 'Patriot act,' more like. If you want to make an actual correlation with legislation, try pointing a serious camera around a mall, or any city block declared to be one. Obviously some young guard overstepped. Actually, it was "Ranger Rick" and not a young guard. Sure the unPatriot Act is full of shit due to the wording. However, there were plenty of the Senate and House the supported the crappy written thing. There is probably a bazaar czar in charge of photography.

12-06-2009, 06:51 PM	#25
jogiba Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Millstone,NJ Posts: 6,491	Right-wing authoritarianism

12-06-2009, 07:08 PM	#26
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by jogiba Right-wing authoritarianism I suggest you look at the California General Assembly as well as its U.S. Senators and many of its Reps and thin re-think that.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search