[Fenwoodian]

.
I've mentioned before, that when I go out with a full frame camera, a big lens, and a tripod I sometimes get a hard time by either the subject or the owner of the property I'm shooting. I exclusively shoot on public property

Sunday the wife and I were driving around rural Wisconsin looking to photograph the autumn colors. I was using my K1 with an adapted Leica 350mm lens on a Gitzo tripod.

My wife grew up on a farm and when she saw a small herd of cows in a pasture about 50 yards from the road she asked me to stop and take a photo. We were on a gravel road and had not seen another car in a long time. So I pulled over and proceeded to take the below photo.

Well, over the hill came a pickup truck. It approached and stopped directly in front of my camera. The driver said he owned the cows and asked what I was doing. I explained that I was an amateur photographer and didn't see any autumn colors to photograph, so I pulled over to practice my craft by shooting the cows.

The farmer then asked that I pay him $100 per cow for taking the cow's photograph (30 cows X $100 USD = $3,000 USD total). I quickly changed the subject thinking he was joking. But then he said it again and asked for the money in a more demanding tone of voice. I packed up my gear and drove off, not wanting to get into an argument on my rights to shoot from a public right of way for personal use.

These confrontations have become more frequent lately. To the point where I'm sometimes making gear decisions based on the amount of crap I anticipate receiving if I use larger sized gear. I don't shoot street photography, but am beginning to understand why street photographers like to use small cameras.

Many view small cameras and smartphones as non-threatening and don't mind them (my brother is always taking photos with his smartphone and has never been confronted). But these same people will get suspicious and angry if you use large pro gear (especially on a tripod).

Have you experienced such in your face demands for money? Have you noticed it's easier to take photos with smartphones than serious cameras?
.

---

Last edited by Fenwoodian; 05-06-2020 at 10:47 PM.

[FozzFoster]

surreal story - thanks for sharing!

[The Squirrel Mafia]

Craziness. That hasn't happened to me yet & hopefully it doesn't.

[stevebrot]

.
The farmer then asked that I pay him $100 per cow for taking the cow's photograph (30 cows X $100 USD = $3,000 USD total).

I would have suggested he remove the distracting yellow tags from their ears, otherwise the cows are only worth $0.10 per cow as far aesthetic considerations.

That joke aside, he may have been motivated by suspicions you were from PETA or is simply in a bad mood.

As for personal experiences...nothing like yours, though I was had someone tell me they were calling the police because I was photographing my own 4 year-old daughter playing on the slide at a local park.


Steve

[swanlefitte]

With my ks2 I get mixed reactions from wow that's a nice camera to that's nothing.
Back when I did video I had a colorful canon xl1s which got so many looks I with I had the sony.

[sergysergy]

Ridiculous. You should have asked for money to answer his questions.

[gump]

should have taken his photo and said it was evidence when file an harassment charge.

[aslyfox]

you did the right thing

it wasn't worth the possible trouble

_____________________________________

the closest thing I have run into that is remotely similar is a farmer's wife complaining when we were taking photos of their pasture ( it had burrowing owls and prairie dogs in it )

she called the local sheriff and a deputy came out. on the call

she found our vehicle, with the assistant deputy coroner for the county driving and me, an attorney since 1982, and two others inside

the deputy quickly admitted we had done nothing wrong

The deputy said the land owner was afraid we were photographing the home, we were not

I should have asked the deputy if the land owner had complained about google earth's satellite photos as well

[othar]

We were on a gravel road and had not seen another car in a long time.

It beeing a gravel road may mean you where on private property, so he can charge you for photographing on his land or send you away. That beeing said $100 per cow is a ridiculous high charge, so he probably just wanted you gone.

With "bigger" gear like my K-3 and a Samyang 35mm lens I sometime get asked if I am shooting for a newspaper or something like that. I had once someone who told me he didn't want to be photographed, but that luckily isn't a problem for me because of the data protection law and right in one's own image law I anyhow just take pictures of unrecognisable people when I do streetphotography (either by bluring them via long exposures or just photographing their backs).
Otherwise you theoretically have to get everyone who is seen in the picture to sign a model release, just too much hassle if someone accidentially sees his picture in any exhibition.

[Bob 256]

Big deal around here. It started with a cattle processing plant where some of the cows were photographed being severely mistreated and ended with our state legislature passing a law making it a crime to photograph on farms. That law was recently overturned by a Federal appeals court Court (with our state paying the court costs) but a good few farmers are really sensitive about any photographs being taken most anywhere that involves their property (regardless of where you are standing). Crazy days!

[Wingincamera]

I only had this happen once, at a public park. I was taking family photos while at the park and a woman who was accidentally in some of the photos approached me and demanded I stop taking photos and wanted me to delete any that might have included her in the photo. I probably should have handled it better, but I told her I was in a public place and can take a picture of anything or anyone in view, as long as it wasn't for commercial use. She started to talk more about it, but I turned around and walked away, and continued what I was doing. I heard her mention some type of vague threat about reporting me, but didn't see her again.

There was one time at a train station platform where I was taking a picture of the train leaving the platform at sunrise. The guard there waited until I had finished then approached and informed it was against the law for me to take pictures there. I made a comment about how I had checked this location out first using Google Earth and he just laugh, and admitted I could also just walk across the street and take all the photos I wanted of the trains. He was very polite about it, just doing his job.

[kjfishman]

Went to a concert and they said no video no photographs yet half the people were doing both with their phones, I suspect the clown who wanted the money would not have said a thing if you were using your phone.

[ChatMechant]

I would have assumed he was joking too.
At least he didnt try to charge you for the corn.

[tvdtvdtvd]

Sounds like a savvy, albiet surly, rancher. He may have just been pulling numbers from the air, OR, he may have some inkling of what a
professional photographer might charge to photograph his cows, and possibly some inkling of what said pro photog might then charge for usage
of photographs of >his< cows. One can easily imagine your conversation occurring in the reverse, with similar figures quoted and emotions
evoked.

Farmer: "How much to photograph my cows?"
Photographer: "$100"
Farmer: "$100?!"
Photographer: "Each"

[gatorguy]

I've only been confronted once, by an older woman who firmly and vehemently told me it was illegal to photograph children. This was at a farmers market and the girl was organizing produce. No relation between the girl and the older lady. I simply moved on.

I've heard that particular claim a few times now, and I've politely advised there is no such law, at least here in the US, whenever it comes up. This was the only time that I felt there was a chance of a situation escalating so best just to step down.